March 7
NEW HAMPSHIE:
Death penalty repeal bill up for vote in House
The New Hampshire House is set to vote on a bill to repeal the state's death
penalty.
A similar bill passed both the House and Senate last year only to be vetoed by
Republican Gov. Chris Sununu. It's unclear whether supporters of the new bill
would have enough votes to override another veto, but momentum has grown since
Democrats won control of both Houses in November.
The bill heads to the floor Thursday with the backing of the House Criminal
Justice and Public Safety Committee.
The state hasn't executed anyone since 1939, and the repeal bill would not
apply retroactively to Michael Addison, who killed Manchester Police Officer
Michael Briggs in 2006 and is the state's only death row inmate. But supporters
of capital punishment argue that courts will see it differently.
(source: Associated Press)
NORTH CAROLINA:
Wake County, North Carolina Imposes First Death Sentence in More Than a Decade
For the 1st time in more than a decade, a jury in Wake County, North Carolina
has sentenced a defendant to death. On March 4, 2019, a capital sentencing jury
voted to impose the death penalty upon Seaga Edward Gillard, convicted of the
double murder of a pregnant prostitute and her boyfriend, who was assisting her
in her business. It was the county’s tenth death-penalty trial since 2008, but
juries had rejected a death sentence in each of the previous nine cases.
Prosecutors portrayed the Caribbean-born Gillard as a man who preyed on sex
workers and told the jury that the case was about securing “maximum justice.”
The sentence bucks a trend in North Carolina, where the use of the death
penalty has declined significantly over the last decade. Just 14 death
sentences have been imposed in the state from 2009-2018 – more than a 90%
decline off the peak of 241 death sentences imposed from 1991-2000 – and North
Carolina has not carried out an execution since 2006. However, Wake County has
continued to be an outlier in the state. The 10 Wake County prisoners on North
Carolina's death row at the end of 2012 placed the county among the 2% of
counties that accounted for 56% of all prisoners on U.S. death rows. Gretchen
Engel, executive director of North Carolina’s Center for Death Penalty
Litigation criticized the prosecution as wasteful and discriminatory. “Since
taking over as Wake district attorney, Lorrin Freeman has pursued the death
penalty more than any other prosecutor in North Carolina, costing taxpayers
millions of dollars,” Engel said. “That is a poor investment, even in this
case.”
Wake County has had 4 capital trials since Freeman’s election in 2014, with
another capital case in jury selection. 8 of the 10 prisoners on the county’s
death row are Black, 1 is Latino, and just 1 is white, and 8 of the 10
defendants tried capitally since 2008 have been Black. “All it shows is that,
if you try 10 death penalty cases in a row and exclude from the jury all the
people who oppose the death penalty, you can find a jury that will sentence a
person to death despite the death penalty's documented unfairness,” Engel said.
Although Engel said Gillard committed a serious crime for which he should be
punished, she questioned whether his crime was “the worst of the worst.” In
March 2016, Wake County jurors sentenced Nathan Holden to life for the
double-murder of his ex-wife's parents and attempted murder of his ex-wife. In
January 2018, in a crime Freeman had called “everybody’s worst nightmare,” a
jury also sentenced Donovan Jevonte Richardson to 2 life sentences for a home
break-in that ended in a double murder. “Wake County jurors have refused to
impose the death penalty in other double homicide cases and even in a case in
which the defendant was convicted of murdering 5 people,” Engel said. “All
today's verdict shows is what we already knew: That the death penalty is
imposed arbitrarily, and disproportionately on black men.”
(source: Death Penalty Information Center)
GEORGIA:
Justice Foretells Future Debate on Cruel and Unusual Punishment----“I am
skeptical that our analytical approach to the Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Clause of the Georgia Constitution is consistent with the original public
meaning of that Clause,” Justice Nels Peterson said.
If the Georgia Supreme Court had a crystal ball, it might show a debate coming
up about what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
That prediction comes from a concurring opinion Justice Nels Peterson wrote and
shared Monday expressing concern that the high court could be off track on the
subject. It also offers a textbook definition of originalism.
“I am skeptical that our analytical approach to the Cruel and Unusual
Punishment Clause of the Georgia Constitution is consistent with the original
public meaning of that Clause,” Peterson began—getting straight to his point as
he can be counted on to do.
Peterson agreed fully with the majority opinion by Justice Keith Blackwell.
Blackwell explained the high court’s decision to reinstate a 20-year prison
sentence that a judge for a habeas corpus challenge threw out on the
determination that it was “cruel and unusual.” Blackwell said the habeas court
was wrong on the facts and the law.
The case at hand is that of Brandon Pate. Prosecutors and two witnesses told
the jury about a night in late December 2006 or early January 2007—when Pate
was 15 years old—at the home of a girl identified as M.R., who was 13,
according to Blackwell.
M.R. had let her best friend sneak into her bedroom window to watch television
and eat snacks, even though her father—asleep in the next room—had forbidden
her to have visitors that night. Pate and another boy had dropped off the best
friend. Pate returned through the window later, ostensibly to pick up the
friend. But then he demanded sex from M.R. When she refused, he pulled a knife
from his pocket and threatened to “slit your dad’s throat.” Believing him, she
complied. She said nothing for 2 years. When she finally told her father, he
reported the incident to police, according to Blackwell.
Pate was convicted in 2010 of statutory rape, aggravated assault and possession
of a knife during the commission of a felony, Blackwell said. He was sentenced
to 20 years in prison for the statutory rape, plus probation for another 20
years for aggravated assault and an additional five years of probation for
possession of a knife. The jury acquitted him of the most serious charge,
forcible rape.
In 2018, a Washington County judge set aside the convictions on the grounds
that both Pate and M.R. were juveniles and so the case should not have been a
felony, and that the sentence was “cruel and unusual,” Blackwell said.
“We first consider the determination of the habeas court that the statutory
rape of which Pate was found guilty is only a misdemeanor,” Blackwell said.
“The habeas court reasoned that Pate was ‘not more than 2 years older’ than
M.R. at the time of the statutory rape, and for that reason, his conduct was
punishable only as a misdemeanor under OCGA § 16-6-3 (c).”
That law says that a case is a misdemeanor if a victim is at least age 14 but
under 16 and the person convicted of statutory rape is 18 or younger.
“Here, M.R. was only 13 years of age at the time of the statutory rape,”
Blackwell said.
Next, the court turned to the finding that the sentence was cruel and unusual.
“In this case, the habeas court’s inference of gross disproportionality
Rested principally on its view that the conduct underlying Pate’s conviction
for statutory rape was merely ‘consensual sex with an individual younger than
him’ and was only a ‘passive felony.’ But the record shows that this
characterization is wrong.” Blackwell said. “M.R. did not readily consent to
sex with Pate at all—she refused him repeatedly and expressly. She finally gave
in and agreed to have sex with Pate only after he brandished a knife and
threatened to kill her father, who was asleep in an adjoining bedroom. To call
such conduct ‘consensual sex’ and only a ‘passive felony’ is to grossly
mischaracterize what Pate did to M.R.”
Blackwell went on to say that Pate’s 20 years in prison “does not meet even the
threshold inference of gross disproportionality, and so, despite his young age,
his sentence for statutory rape must stand.”
Attorney General Chris Carr had no comment on Blackwell’s decision or
Peterson’s concurrence.
Pate was represented by Ecleynne Mercy and Timothy McCalep.
“I am extremely disappointed with the Supreme Court’s ruling,” McCalep said. “I
am however, optimistic that the Court’s opinion will benefit other defendants
seeking justice and relief.”
Peterson’s concerns about the “original public meaning” of cruel and unusual
punishment in the Georgia Constitution could come up again.
Peterson cited Elliott v. State, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 112, at *17 (II) (C) (Case No.
S18A1204, decided Feb. 18, 2019). The Elliott opinion said the justices “should
not simply recite holdings” of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the U.S.
Constitution and “uncritically import them into our interpretation” of parallel
provisions of the Georgia Constitution,” Peterson said.
“But for the last several decades, we have done precisely that in our
application of Georgia’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause,” Peterson said.
“Instead, we should interpret the Clause according to its original public
meaning, informed by its text, context, and history.”
“Interpretation of this provision requires consideration of its meaning in
1861,” Peterson said. “Shortly after the Georgia provision’s adoption, we
explained the meaning of the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment,”
Peterson said. That holding was that, as long as the General Assembly does not
provide cruel and unusual punishments, “such as disgraced the civilization of
former ages, and make one shudder with horror to read of them, as drawing,
quartering, burning,” the Constitution does not limit legislative discretion.
“We expressly viewed this construction as incompatible with what would become
the United States Supreme Court’s ‘evolving standards of decency’ analysis,”
Peterson said. “But then the United States Supreme Court’s dramatic shift in
interpretation of the Eighth Amendment during the 1970s—including the
invalidation of Georgia’s death penalty—knocked us off course. And by the late
1980s, we had reversed course entirely.”
Peterson cited Fleming v. Zant, 259 Ga. 687 (1989). He said in that opinion the
court addressed the history and context of the Georgia Constitution in one
sentence and then “flatly ignored” it in the next, turning away from 100 years
of precedent.
“Ever since, we have applied the United States Supreme Court’s ‘evolving
standards of decency’ analysis to decide questions under the Georgia
Constitution,” Peterson said. “It seems to me quite likely that such an
approach cannot be squared with the original public meaning of the Georgia
Constitution, and if it cannot, we should reconsider our approach in the proper
case.”
The case is Conley v. Pate, No. S18A1121.
(source: law.com)
LOUISIANA:
Capital murder trial of man accused in 2012 Lafayette child's death postponed
The Lafayette death penalty trial of a man accused of raping, beating and
murdering his girlfriend’s 3-year-old son in 2012 has been delayed again.
Landon Broussard, 27, is charged with 1st-degree murder in the November 2012
death of Julien Madera.
His trial was scheduled to begin March 11 but has been delayed. Court records
Wednesday did not indicate why the trial was postponed.
Previous trial dates also were re-set. Some of the delays were because the
public defender’s office in 2016 ran out of money, canceling the contract of
Broussard’s lead defense counsel. Also, in 2015, one of his defense attorneys
filed 48 motions right before the trial.
While his girlfriend at the time, Laura Smith, was attending class in 2012,
Broussard allegedly killed her son, carrying his lifeless body to his
grandmother’s home on Kaliste Saloom Road. According to police reports,
Broussard told his grandmother he found the child unresponsive in the bathtub
and that a door had fallen on him the previous night.
Police reports said the child’s body was covered with bruises that indicate he
had been beaten for a prolonged period of time. His eyes were swollen shut and
part of his ear was torn. Broussard was charged with 1st-degree murder and
rape. The District Attorney’s Office and Assistant District Attorney Bill Babin
dismissed the rape charge pending the murder trial.
Smith pleaded guilty to second-degree cruelty to a juvenile for not trying to
stop the abuse. She was sentenced to 5 years in prison at hard labor. She was
placed on probation in January 2017.
(source: theadvocate.com)
OHIO:
Cruel and unusual punishment: Executions temporarily halted in Ohio
Anti-death penalty activists have been fighting for decades in an uphill battle
to end the barbaric and racist practice of executions, but the movement has
been making slow but steady progress. Last year Washington became the 20th
state to ban executions. Polls show public support for the death penalty
continues to decline, with more people than ever convinced it is applied
unfairly. (Death Penalty Information Center)
In the latest breakthrough, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine suspended all executions in
the state Feb. 21. Previously on Jan. 25, the governor had postponed the Feb.
15 execution date of Warren Keith Henness to Sept. 16.
Ohio had one of the highest rates of executions before 2014. However, there
were problems with lethal injection — the preferred killing method that
replaced the electric chair in most death penalty states. Witnesses observed
the condemned experiencing severe pain. In 2009 the attempted execution of
Romell Broom was botched; Broom survived and remains on death row. Ohio then
introduced an untried killing formula combining midazolam and hydromorphone.
The first victim, Dennis McGuire, was observed writhing in agony and gasping
for air.
For 3½ years there were no executions in Ohio. Then in 2017 a new drug
combination was introduced, which still used midazolam. 2 people were executed
that year, and 1 — Robert Van Hook — in July 2018.
An autopsy performed on Van Hook revealed that in his last hour of life his
lungs filled up with fluid. Attorneys for Henness raised the “cruel and unusual
punishment” argument. Federal Magistrate Judge Michael Merz agreed; he called
the current protocol a combination of “waterboarding and a chemical fire.”
(Youngstown Vindicator, March 3) His ruling prompted DeWine’s decision to halt
executions, but only until some more “humane” method of killing is presented.
Five other men set to be executed this year have not had their executions
cancelled or postponed.
Merz, a seasoned judge who came out of retirement, is not known for progressive
rulings. Merz handed down rulings against both Imam Siddique Abdullah Hasan and
Keith Lamar, who were convicted of capital murder in connection with the 1993
Lucasville prison uprising. His decision reflects the fact that it has become
politically harder for states to continue taking lives using the death penalty.
Why now?
Although some polls show a majority of people still support capital punishment
in certain cases, that majority is shrinking. One factor is the irrefutable
evidence of racist disparity in sentencing. As recently as last year, nearly
half of all new death sentences were imposed on people of color. Other factors
include the number of people on death row with mental disabilities and the risk
of innocent people being executed, which was affirmed by the exoneration of 164
death row prisoners since 1976.
In Ohio, those wrongfully convicted of capital murder include Hasan, Lamar (aka
Bomani Shakur), George Skatzes, Nameer Mateen (aka James Were) and Jason Robb.
All were falsely accused in the death of a guard, and some in the killing of
prisoners, during the Lucasville rebellion. Lamar exhausted his appeals in
December and was given an execution date of Nov. 16, 2023. Public meetings,
held last year around the 25th anniversary of the rebellion, increased
awareness that innocent people still face execution.
In addition, recent scandals have exposed illegal conduct by several states in
procuring the fatal drug cocktails. According to the Death Penalty Information
Center, “States have used secrecy laws to conceal evidence of illegal or
improper activity in obtaining lethal-injection drugs, including lying to
pharmaceutical companies, contracting with suppliers that have histories of
safety violations and swapping drugs with other states.” This has put states in
conflict with Big Pharma and has resulted in several lawsuits.
Because of these and other factors, executions dropped last year to a
countrywide low of 54, continuing a recent trend.
However, death penalty opponents will not rest. As Ben Turk, administrator for
the Lucasville Amnesty website and Facebook page, told Workers World: “I
support not only the suspension but also the immediate abolition of the death
penalty, but I also caution against replacing it with life without the
possibility of parole.
“Greg Curry, one of the Lucasville survivors who narrowly escaped the death
penalty (both in court and in extrajudicial efforts of retaliatory staff) is
instead serving life without the possibility of parole. If that reform becomes
the widespread replacement for the death penalty, this reform will actually
lead to more innocent people dying in prison because they’ll have less access
to legal redress. We must oppose death by incarceration as strongly as we
oppose death by lethal injection.”
(source: Workers.org)
_______________________________________________
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
