September 2
TEXAS:
Mexican national scheduled for execution in Texas despite claims of treaty
violations
A mentally ill Mexican national with claims of brain damage is set for
execution in November, more than 2 decades after he was convicted of killing
his wife and 2 youngest children near the southern border.
Robert Moreno Ramos is scheduled to die by lethal injection on Nov. 14,
according to Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jeremy Desel.
The 64-year-old immigrant was sent to death row in 1993 for the slayings of his
wife Leticia and their children, Abigail and Jonathan, who were found buried
beneath the bathroom floor in the couple's Hidalgo County home.
For years, his lawyers have contended that his execution would be a violation
of international treaty as he wasn't properly notified of his right to tell the
Mexican consulate about his arrest and request legal assistance from his
country. On top of that, they argue, Ramos had abysmal legal representation
during trial and jurors never learned about his severely abusive childhood,
brain dysfunction, bipolar disorder and low IQ.
In February 1992, a neighbor in Progreso heard screams coming from the Ramos
home. It wasn't until two months later that investigators unearthed the
family's remains.
That April, Ramos was picked up on an outstanding traffic ticket, then
questioned without a lawyer. Eventually, he gave authorities the OK to search
his home - and they found blood inside.
Under further questioning, records show, Ramos drew police a map to bathroom,
where the bodies were buried.
But Ramos told investigators he didn't kill his wife and children. Instead, he
said that he came home to find his family slain and decided to hide the bodies
so his surviving eldest son wouldn't find out.
He didn't get a lawyer until three months after his arrest, according to
defense filings. During his trial, prosecutors argued that he'd beaten to death
his wife and two children with some type of blunt instrument and then married
another woman days later.
Defense lawyers argued in the 1993 case that unknown drug dealers committed the
triple slaying. After the state introduced testimony implying he'd killed his
first wife in Mexico, Ramos was convicted and sentenced to death in a matter of
hours.
In the punishment phase, attorneys for Ramos didn't cross-examine the state's
witnesses, offered no evidence and didn't ask the jury to spare their client
from the death penalty, according to court records.
Mexican authorities learned of Ramos' arrest through news reports nearly a year
after the fact, according to court records. During appeals, attorneys for Ramos
said that late notification could have made a difference because Mexico often
provides extra defense support in capital cases and might have done so had they
known sooner.
But the state argued that extra help from Mexico wouldn't have resulted in a
different outcome.
ALSO: After covering more than 400 executions, AP’s Graczyk calls it quits
On appeal, Ramos raised concerns about earlier bad lawyering, and also alleged
that the state had violated Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations by not telling him about his right to speak to his nation's
consulate.
Ultimately, the courts refused to grant him relief in part because the Vienna
Convention is only enforceable between countries - it's not up to American
federal courts to enforce the application of international treaties in
individual criminal cases.
More than 15 years ago, Ramos was one of 54 death row inmates named in a
complaint to the United Nations World Court, when Mexico accused the U.S. of
violating international treaties and asked for a stay in all of the cases. The
international court decided the prisoners should get their cases reviewed. But
the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 deemed that decision unenforceable, unless
Congress takes legislative action.
Neither Ramos' defense counsel nor Hidalgo County prosecutors responded to
requests for comment Friday.
The case bears some similarities to that of Ruben Cardenas, another Mexican
national who was executed last year amid international outcry and claims of
global treaty violations.
Despite pushback from Mexico and Cardenas' claims of innocence, the 47-year-old
was put to death in November for the murder of his teenage cousin.
"It is as if the United States were thumbing its nose at the government of
Mexico and the United Nations," Sandra Babcock, a Cornell Law School professor
specializing in international issues surrounding capital punishment, told the
Chronicle last year. "And when I say the U.S., I should be clear that we're
talking about Texas."
The Lone Star State has executed 8 men this year, and another 7 - including
Ramos - are scheduled for the remainder of 2018.
(source: Houston Chronicle)
ALABAMA:
Former Alabama State Trooper to be retried for wife's 1995 murder
Attorney General Steve Marshall announced that the indictment of former state
trooper George Martin will be reinstated and that he will be retried for the
1995 capital murder of his wife in Mobile County. The Alabama Supreme Court
today reversed lower court rulings that had dismissed the indictment.
Martin was convicted in 2000 and served 15 years on death row for killing
Hammoleketh Martin.
In 2015 the conviction was overturned and a new trial was ordered. Rather than
proceeding with a retrial, the lower court dismissed the indictment and Martin
was freed. The Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the lower court's decision in
2016. Today, the Supreme Court reversed both decisions.
In today's order, the Court restates the facts of the case as follows: "In
1995, the charred remains of Martin's wife, Hammoleketh, were found inside a
burned vehicle that had collided with a tree. Although it appeared to be an
accident, evidence indicated that the vehicle fire was intentionally set and
that the victim was alive when the fire started.
Further evidence indicated that Martin made inconsistent statements to law
enforcement concerning the time he discovered his wife missing, whether his
wife carried a gasoline can in her vehicle and whether his wife had used a BIC
brand lighter found at the scene as a flashlight because the dome light in her
vehicle did not work."
Although Martin acknowledged the existence of a $200,000 life insurance policy,
he denied there was any other. In fact, there was another policy for $150,000
that was collectible only if his wife died in a passenger vehicle. A trooper
report prepared by Martin the year before involved an accident with similar
circumstances.
The Attorney General's Criminal Appeals Division argued that the indictment was
improperly dismissed and that Martin should be required to stand trial again.
The Alabama Supreme Court agreed and reversed the lower courts' decisions and
ordered that Martin must be retried for capital murder.
The Attorney General's Criminal Trials Division will prosecute the case.
Attorney General Marshall commended Assistant Attorney General Audrey Jordan
for her successful work in handling the matter on appeal.
(source: WENY news)
MISSOURI:
U Law Professor Files Amicus Brief in Capital Punishment Case
On Aug. 23, University of Utah law professor, Paul Cassell, and Allyson Ho of
the Washington, D.C. law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP filed an amicus
curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court. The brief was filed for the capital
case of Bucklew v. Precythe. Interested parties listed in the brief are Melissa
Sanders and Arizona Voice for Crime Victims, Inc. (AVCV). Melissa Sanders is
the sister of Michael Sanders, who was shot and killed in front of his young
sons, by Russel Bucklew.
Cassell is well known for his work advocating for victim rights. His
publications include a 2008 article, “In Defense of the Death Penalty,” and
another in 2013, “Crime Victims’ Rights During Criminal Investigations?
Applying the Crime Victims’ Rights Act Before Criminal Charges Are Filed.”
Bucklew murdered Michael Sanders, who had begun a relationship with Stephanie
Ray, Bucklew’s ex-girlfriend. Bucklew then kidnapped and raped Ray until he was
caught and imprisoned. Bucklew later escaped from prison and held Ray’s mother
hostage — although she was fortunate enough to escape — and Bucklew was again
captured.
Cassell’s amicus brief advocates for the victim’s right and requests that the
court consider putting “an end to re-victimization through perpetual
litigation” by barring Bucklew from “invoking equitable relief under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983.” Describing Bucklew’s nearly 20-year-old litigation strategy as
“manipulative and dilatory,” the amicus brief calls into question Bucklew’s
choice to present a facial challenge to Missouri’s lethal injection protocol
while reserving an as-applied challenge for a later date.
In March of this year, the Supreme Court granted a stay of Bucklew’s execution
after his lawyer, Robert N. Hochman, presented an as-applied challenge to
Missouri’s execution procedure. He argued that it would qualify as cruel and
unusual punishment, due to Bucklew’s medical condition, cavernous hemangioma,
which causes blood-filled tumors to form in his mouth and throat.
Cassell’s amicus brief accuses Bucklew of “exploiting” his condition both to
escape from prison and to prolong litigation, citing Bucklew’s 2008 plea for
funds to hire a medical expert in support of a clemency application as evidence
of his previous “awareness of a possible as-applied challenge based on his
condition.”
The high profile capital case has been frequently in the spotlight, especially
after last year’s controversy regarding Missouri’s right to withhold
information on the execution drug’s supplier. On Feb. 14, 2017, a Missouri
appellate court ruled that the same law that protects the identity of an
execution team also applies to the execution drug’s supplier.
In August 2017, an article published by the Council of State Governments
reported a nationwide shortage of sodium thiopental, one of the three drugs
used in the execution cocktail, after the sole national provider, Hospira,
ceased production following a global campaign lead by death penalty
abolitionists.
The context of this Missouri capital case, as well as the controversy
surrounding Missouri’s execution protocols, hits close to home in Utah. In
2015, a shortage of the execution drug spurred Utah’s governor, Gary Herbert,
to sign a bill allowing execution by firing squad in cases where the execution
drug is not available. Utah remains the only state to allow this measure.
Last year, however, Herbert significantly pivoted in his historical stance on
the capital punishment, stating that he would consider signing a bill to repeal
the death penalty in Utah. The proposed bill HB 379, sponsored by former
Republican Representative Gage Froerer, was killed after being sent to rules
committee at the term of last years legislative session. One of the arguments
posed in favor of the bill was the length of appeal times risking
re-victimization of victims and their families.
(source: Daily Utah Chronicle)
USA:
Prospective jurors due in court for death penalty retrial
The process of choosing a jury for the 2nd death penalty trial of a man charged
with abducting and killing a Vermont supermarket worker nearly 2 decades ago is
set to begin in U.S. District Court in Rutland.
The 1st prospective jurors for the retrial of Donald Fell are due to arrive
Tuesday in federal court to fill out jury questionnaires, said clerk Jeffrey
Eaton.
About 700 people from across Vermont have received notices, he said. After the
initial screening reduces the number to about 65, the final selection of a
12-person jury with 4 alternatives is expected to begin Oct. 1.
Eaton did not know when opening statements could be held.
Prosecutors say that that on Nov. 27, 2000, Fell, now 38, and friend Robert Lee
killed Fell’s mother, Debra Fell, and her friend Charles Conway in a Rutland
apartment. Fell and Lee then abducted Terry King as she arrived for work at a
Rutland supermarket because they wanted her car to escape Vermont. King was
beaten to death later that day by the side of the road in New York state.
Lee hanged himself in prison in 2001.
Over the years, Fell has repeatedly offered to plead guilty in exchange for a
prison sentence of life without parole, but prosecutors have rejected the
offer, insisting he face the death penalty.
Fell was convicted in 2005 and sentenced to death, but the conviction was
thrown out in 2014 due to juror misconduct.
(source: Associated Press)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
