May 9
TEXAS:
Court upholds capital murder conviction and death sentence for Joseph Colone
A Texas court has upheld the capital murder conviction and death sentence for a
man who killed a mother and daughter.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled Wednesday and denied the appeal of
Joseph Colone.
In July of 2010, Colone shot and killed 41-year-old Mary Goodman and her
16-year-old daughter, Briana, at their home on Hartel Street in south Beaumont.
Mary Goodman had identified Colone as the man who robbed a Beaumont game room
in June of 2010.
Prosecutors say he murdered Goodman to prevent her from testifying against him
in that robbery and killed Briana because she was also at the home.
A jury in May 2017 decided Colone should receive the death penalty for the
capital murder conviction and Judge Raquel West sentenced him to death.
Colone appealed, claiming among other things, the judge should have granted him
a change of venue due to publicity about the case.
The appeals court ruled against Colone in each of the points of error he
contends took place.
(source: KFDM news)
*******************
Texas House OKs bill to ban death penalty for those with severe mental
illness----Under the measure, defendants who have active psychotic symptoms of
certain mental illnesses at the time of the crime would be ineligible for
capital punishment. But the bill's author believes death penalty proponents may
keep it from passing on a necessary final vote later this week.
For the 2nd time in 2 weeks, the Texas House moved to change death penalty law.
On Wednesday, the chamber tentatively passed a measure that would prohibit
handing down a death sentence to someone with a severe mental illness, like
schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. House Bill 1936 by state Rep. Toni Rose,
D-Dallas, would let capital murder defendants present evidence at trial that
they were severely mentally ill at the time of the crime. If the jury agrees,
the defendant would be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of
parole if found guilty.
The measure passed on a quick voice vote with no discussion after being delayed
several times in the last week. The bill will come up again this week for a
final, recorded vote. If passed, it would then go to the Senate.
But Rose doesn't expect her colleagues in the lower chamber to approve it on
that necessary final vote later this week, the Austin American-Statesman
reported Wednesday night. She told the paper she expects it to face opposition
from Republican proponents of the death penalty.
Rose’s bill would allow defendants with mental illness to be ineligible for the
death penalty if they had schizophrenia, a schizoaffective disorder, or a
bipolar disorder, and, at the time of the crime, had active psychotic symptoms
that impaired the defendant’s rationality or understanding of the consequences
of their actions. Rose brought a similar bill to the Legislature in 2017, but
it never made it to the House floor for debate.
Last Monday, the House moved to create a pretrial process for determining if a
capital murder defendant had an intellectual disability and, therefore, would
be constitutionally ineligible for execution. Another bill was passed last
month to clarify juror instructions in death penalty cases. Neither of those
bills have made it out of Senate committees yet.
There is currently no law that restricts issuing a death sentence for mentally
ill defendants, but the U.S. Supreme Court has held that inmates must be able
to understand that they are about to be put to death — and why — to actually
carry out executions.
The most well-known inmate with mental illness is Scott Panetti, a diagnosed
schizophrenic who killed his wife’s parents in 1992 and has lived on Texas’
death row for nearly a quarter century. At his trial, Panetti — who represented
himself — dressed as a cowboy and tried to call witnesses such as the Pope,
John F. Kennedy and Jesus Christ.
(source: The Texas Tribune)
*************
Death penalty bill faces uncertain vote in House
Though the Texas House gave preliminary approval Wednesday to a bill that would
deem people convicted of capital murder ineligible for the death penalty if a
jury finds that they have a severe mental illness, the bill’s author expects it
to fail on final passage Thursday.
The House must approve bills on two separate days, and Rep. Toni Rose,
D-Dallas, says House Bill 1936 will run up against Republicans who support the
death penalty in its second vote. Rose slid it by her colleagues Wednesday, she
said, as the bill came to the floor as many members returned from lunch.
Under HB 1936, defendants could ask the jury during the sentencing phase to
provide a separate determination on whether the defendant had schizophrenia, a
schizoaffective disorder or a bipolar disorder at the time of the murder. Those
who are found guilty and to have one of the illnesses to the degree that it
hindered their decision-making process would be sentenced to life without
parole.
The defense must provide a notice 30 days before the trial date that it intends
to prove that the defendant had a severe mental illness. Additionally, either
side or the judge can call an expert to examine the defendant.
Rose’s bill was grouped with other death penalty bills in the House Criminal
Jurisprudence Committee, where it passed along party lines 5-3 with one
Republican absent. Yet, she said her bill was about mental illness policy
rather than death penalty policy.
“A person can’t control what they’re born with,” said Rose, who was a mental
health professional in Dallas prior to her first House election in 2013. “If
you’re born with a mental illness, how are you going to be able to control
that?”
Canvassing for the bill showed Rose that Texans and members of the Legislature
lack mental illness awareness, she said.
“We’re the state leaders. We’re the leaders of Texas, and if we don’t
understand, how can we make laws regarding mental health?” Rose said. “If we
don’t understand it, how can we make good judgment on the resources and
allocating funds for Texas?”
Last week, the House passed HB 1139, authored by Rep. Senfronia Thompson,
D-Houston, which would move intellectual disability hearings to the beginning
of capital crime court cases and clarify that people declared to have an
intellectual disability cannot be given the death penalty.
Thompson first filed her bill in 2003, yet it wasn’t until the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled in February that the state’s current process — which repeats the
sentencing phase if the defendant is later found to have an intellectual
disability — is insufficient that it received traction in the House.
HB 1936 began like Thompson’s bill, placing a severe mental illness hearing at
the beginning of the trial. However, following negotiations with state district
attorneys, Rose agreed to remove the determination from pretrial. Still, she
says the attorneys oppose the bill.
Criminal Jurisprudence Committee member Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, said he
is happy with Thompson’s bill but will vote against Rose’s on Thursday because
science has not reached the point where reliable legislation is possible.
“It’s very, very hard to assess mental illness, how it fits into criminal
intent and to inject mental illness decisions into the criminal court process,”
King said, adding that there is no question mental illness affects behavior.
Asked about the disparity between the House’s reception this session between
her bill and Rose’s bill, Thompson pointed to the February Supreme Court case
and the standards for mental illness set after the assassination attempt
against Ronald Reagan in 1981.
“I think they’re looking at the standard of measurement of a person who could
be considered insane, and they’re trying to make these persons come up under
that standard,” Thompson said. “I think they have set the standards too high
for these people to be able to reach.”
(source: Austin American-Statesman)
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
Stick to the facts in death penalty debate
New Hampshire is on course to repeal the death penalty within the month. Given
the vote counts earlier this session, the N.H. House and Senate are expected to
override the governor’s recent veto of House Bill 455. It is understandable
that emotions are running high on both sides of the death penalty debate right
now, but I would ask that the N.H. Chiefs of Police Association stick to facts
when it debates this issue.
In a statement released following the governor’s veto, Mark Chase, president of
the N.H. Chiefs of Police Association, was quoted as saying, “If a repeal
occurs, there will be no penalty for murdering a police officer.” This is
entirely false and misleading, and is an irresponsible statement from a person
in Chase’s position. Murder will always be a crime in New Hampshire, and a
strongly punishable one at that.
Should New Hampshire repeal the death penalty, the murder of a police officer
could carry the punishment of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
That is 365 days a year, for the rest of one’s life, spent in a cement box.
Many argue that permanent imprisonment is actually a more severe punishment
than the death penalty. While this too can be debated, let us at least agree
that life in prison is in fact a penalty.
I hope Mark Chase will clarify his remarks and stick to the facts in his future
remarks.
JOHN KING Concord
(source: Letter to the Editor, Concord Monitor)
GEORGIA:
In Georgia, Women May Receive a Death Sentence for Choosing Abortion
5 days ago, we published a story about Alabama’s new anti-abortion bill, which
would incarcerate doctors who perform abortions at any stage of pregnancy for
up to 99 years. Yesterday in Georgia, a bill was signed into law that would
impose a life sentence—or even the death penalty—for women who elect to abort
after a fetal heartbeat is detectable. Even if a woman goes out of state to
avail herself of the procedure, she could be charged with conspiracy to murder,
along with whoever has transported her.
HB 481 declares that “unborn children are a class of living, distinct person”
that deserves “full legal recognition.” Thus, Georgia law must “recognize
unborn children as natural persons”—not just for the purposes of abortion, but
as a legal rule.
A woman who miscarries because of her own conduct—say, using drugs while
pregnant—would be liable for 2nd-degree murder, punishable by 10 to 30 years’
imprisonment. Prosecutors may interrogate women who miscarry to determine
whether they can be held responsible; if they find evidence of culpability,
they may charge, detain, and try these women for the death of their fetuses.
Although this is definitely 1 of those state laws written expressly to get a
Roe v. Wade challenge in front of the now-conservative-majority Supreme Court,
it is also a prosecution that would not be foreign to the state. Even before
the law was passed, a prosecutor in Georgia charged one woman with murder after
she improperly used an abortion pill in an attempt to end her pregnancy. The
case was dropped once the prosecutor found it legally impermissible; starting
next year, no barriers stand against such a prosecution.
The Medical Association of Georgia and the Georgia Academy of Family Physicians
opposed the legislation, and the ACLU of Georgia said they would challenge the
bill as “unconstitutional.” Heartbeat bills have already become law in
Mississippi and Kentucky. Other states considering such legislation include
Tennessee, Florida, South Carolina, and Ohio.
(source: nonprofitquarterly.org)
FLORIDA----impending execution
Condemned killer seeks stay of execution
Little more than 2 weeks before he is scheduled to die by lethal injection,
Death Row inmate Bobby Joe Long asked the Florida Supreme Court on Wednesday
for a stay of execution.
Gov. Ron DeSantis last month signed a death warrant for Long and scheduled the
execution for May 23.
Long was sentenced to death in the May 1984 murder of Michelle Simms after
picking her up on Kennedy Boulevard in Tampa.
In 1985, Long also pleaded guilty to seven additional first-degree murder
charges and numerous charges for sexual batteries and kidnappings in the Tampa
Bay region.
Long, now 65, is serving multiple life sentences, along with the death
sentence, at Union Correctional Institution.
The motion for a stay of execution is based on the Supreme Court’s pending
consideration of issues in another case involving death row inmate Duane Eugene
Owen. Those issues are rooted in a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case
known as Hurst v. Florida that struck down the state’s death-penalty system. A
heavily debated issue in subsequent cases has been how the Hurst ruling should
apply to defendants, like Long, who have decades-old death sentences.
The motion filed Wednesday said a stay of execution should be issued while the
Supreme Court considers the Owen case.
“If a stay is not granted, and this (Supreme) Court subsequently issues a
favorable ruling in Owen, the harm to Mr. Long -- his death at the hands of the
state -- will obviously be irreparable,” Long’s attorney wrote. “The state of
Florida, in comparison, will suffer little appreciable harm. If a stay is
granted, the only potential harm to the state is a short delay pending full
briefing and disposition of Owen. That delay is worth ensuring that Mr. Long is
not put to death based on an unconstitutional death sentence.”
(source: news4jax.com)
*******************
Re-sentencing for Adam 'Rattlesnake' Davis still uncertain
For many, the name Adam "Rattlesnake" Davis conjures up one of the most
horrific crimes in the Bay Area.
The notorious killer, his then-girlfriend, Valessa Robinson, and their friend
John Whispel plotted to murder Valessa's mother, Vicki Robinson because she
disapproved of Davis dating her daughter.
The gruesome details of the crime spilled out during the trial. First, they
injected her with a syringe full of bleach, but Vicki did not die, so Davis
slit her throat. The trio then stuffed her body in a trashcan.
A jury convicted Davis and sent him to Florida’s death row.
However, 20 years later, Davis' case is back in a Tampa courtroom.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Florida's guidelines for handing down the death
penalty was unconstitutional. The SCOTUS said a jury should be unanimous on the
sentence of death.
In Davis' case, the jury was split, 7 to 5, so Davis gets a 2nd chance at
sentencing.
Witnesses will be called to testify and asked to re-live the details of the
crime.
In court Thursday, Davis's attorney Rick Terrana said preparing for the
re-sentencing won’t be quick or easy. He just finished reviewing boxes of
evidence in the case.
"It's going to take me some time to prepare, as the court might imagine. It’s
going to be quite extensive," said Terrana.
As for Davis' co-defendants, Valessa was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in
prison but was granted early release in 2013.
John Whispel cut a deal and got 25 years. He may be released from prison this
fall.
Soon, Davis will know if he will spend the rest of his life in prison or go
back to death row.
A re-sentencing date has not been set. Meanwhile, prosecutors could decide they
do not want to force witnesses to again testify. Instead, they could cut a
deal, take the death penalty off the table, and Davis would likely get a life
sentence.
(source: Fox News)
ALABAMA----impending execution
Inmate asks US Supreme Court to stay execution, weigh youth
An Alabama man facing execution next week for his role in the 1997 slayings of
4 people has asked the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay, arguing it should weigh
the fact that he was 19 at the time.
Attorneys for Michael Brandon Samra filed the request last week to stay the
scheduled May 16 execution.The court has barred executing anyone under 18 at
the time of their crimes.
Samra’s attorneys asked the court to weigh whether knowledge of brain
development and evolving standards of decency merit extending that age to 21.
“This court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence should reflect the reality that a
person’s neurological and psychological development does not suddenly stop on
his 18th birthday,” his attorneys wrote last week.
Samra was convicted of helping friend Mark Duke kill Duke’s father, the
father’s girlfriend Dedra Mims Hunt, and her 2 daughters, 6-year-old Chelisa
Hunt and seven-year-old Chelsea Hunt in Alabama’s Shelby County.
Prosecutors said the Shelby County slayings happened after Duke became angry
when his father wouldn’t let him use his truck.
They said the teens executed a plan to kill Duke’s father and then killed the
others to cover up his death.
Authorities said Mark Duke killed his father, Hunt and the 6-year-old girl and
that Samra slit the throat of 7-year-old Chelsea at Duke’s direction while the
girl pleaded for her life.
“The murders which were committed with a gun and kitchen knife were as brutal
as they come,” lawyers for the state wrote in the motion to set an execution
date.
Duke was 16 at the time of the slayings. Samra was 19. Both were sentenced to
death.
However, Duke’s death sentence was converted to life without parole after the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled prisoners could not be put to death for crimes that
happened while they were younger than 18.
Samra’s attorney wrote in the court filing that Duke was the driving force
behind the slayings and that Samra, who had borderline level intelligence, was
the “minion.”
“Indeed, while Samra bore responsibility for the death of 1 person, his
culpability paled in comparison to that of his co-defendant who plotted,
planned, and killed 3 of the victims for revenge.” Samra’s attorneys wrote.
(source: yellowhammernews.com)
OHIO:
Judge can decide whether Cleveland death-row inmate released in 2009 was
wrongfully imprisoned----A Cuyahoga County judge can hear the case of former
death row inmate Joe D'Ambrosio, who argues that he was wrongfully imprisoned
for 20 years after his conviction was overturned.
A judge in Cuyahoga County can decide whether a former Cleveland death-row
inmate released from prison in 2009 was wrongfully imprisoned, the Ohio Supreme
Court ruled Wednesday.
The court rejected an argument by Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Michael O’Malley’s
office that Common Pleas Court Judge Michael Russo had no jurisdiction to hear
Joseph D’Ambrosio’s request to be declared wrongfully imprisoned for the two
decades he spent in prison on a 1989 conviction in the death of Tony Klann.
Such a declaration would open the door for D’Ambrosio to receive money from the
state’s Court of Claims.
In the per curiam opinion, the court noted that O’Malley’s office made a
compelling argument that D’Ambrosio lacked the ability to pursue his claim, but
Russo has the ability to make that decision, the court found.
Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor and justices Judith French, Patrick Fischer,
Patrick DeWine, and Melody Stewart joined the opinion. Justice Sharon Kennedy
concurred in judgment only, and Justice Michael Donnelly, a former Common Pleas
judge alongside Russo, did not participate in the case.
The ruling marks another turn in a protracted legal battle.
D’Ambrosio was released from prison in 2009, 3 years after a federal judge
overturned his conviction and found that prosecutors, including now-retired
Assistant Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Carmen Marino, withheld 10 key pieces of
evidence that might have led to a jury finding D’Ambrosio not guilty at trial.
Common Pleas Court Judge Joan Synenberg dismissed all charges against
D’Ambrosio the following year.
Klann’s body was found floating in Doan Brook in what is now Cleveland’s
Rockefeller Park. His throat had been slit. Prosecutors had argued that
D’Ambrosio and 2 other men -- Thomas Michael Keenan and Edward Espinoza,
kidnapped Klann off the street, drove him to the creek and slit his throat with
a bowie knife.
Espinoza cut a deal with prosecutors and testified against D’Ambrosio and
Keenan, who were convicted and sentenced to death.
Keenan’s conviction was also overturned for the same reason as D’Ambrosio’s.
Keenan in 2016 pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary and other charges, was
sentenced to time served, and was released from prison.
D’Ambrosio has maintained his innocence in the killing, but prosecutors insist
that he participated in Klann’s kidnapping.
The case was featured in a 2014 CNN documentary.
To comment on this story, please visit Wednesday’s crime and courts comments
page.
(source: cleveland.com)
_______________________________________________
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
