Dec. 16
TEXAS:
Why Texas' 'death penalty capital of the world' stopped executing people
Since the Supreme Court legalized capital punishment in 1976, Harris County,
Texas, has executed 126 people. That's more executions than every individual
state in the union, barring Texas itself.
Harris County's executions account for 23 percent of the 545 people Texas has
executed. On the national level, the state alone is responsible for more than a
third of the 1,465 people put to death in the United States since 1976.
In 2017, however, the county known as the "death penalty capital of the world"
and the "buckle of the American death belt" executed and sentenced to death a
remarkable number of people: zero.
This is the 1st time since 1985 that Harris County did not execute any of its
death row inmates, and the 3rd year in a row it did not sentence anyone to
capital punishment either.
The remarkable statistic reflects a shift the nation is seeing as a whole.
"The practices that the Harris County District Attorney's Office is following
are also significant because they reflect the growing movement in the United
States toward reform prosecutors who have pledged to use the death penalty more
sparingly if at all," said Robert Dunham, the director of the Death Penalty
Information Center.
The city of Houston lies within the confines of Harris County, making it one of
the most populous counties in the country - and recently it became one of the
most diverse, with a 2012 Rice University report concluded that Houston has
become the most diverse city in the country.
Under these new conditions, Kim Ogg ran in 2016 to become the county's district
attorney as a reformist candidate who pledged to use the death penalty in a
more judicious manner than her predecessors, though the longtime prosecutor
didn't say she would abandon it altogether. Rather, Ogg said she would save it
for the "worst of the worst" - such as serial killer Anthony Shore, who was
rescheduled for execution next month.
But this year, Ogg appears to have held true to her promise of only pursuing
the death penalty in what she deems the most extreme cases. It represents a
break from a long pattern of Harris County prosecutors who pushed for the death
penalty in nearly all capital cases.
"The overall idea of what makes us safer is changing," Ogg said. "We're
reframing the issues. It's no longer the number of convictions or scalps on the
wall. It's making sure the punishment meets the crime."
Ogg's approach has earned her recognition from experts, including those opposed
to the use of capital punishment.
"She is a much more fair-minded prosecutor than we've seen in the past," said
Kristin Houle, the executive director of the Texas Coalition to Abolish the
Death Penalty. "She's very deliberate in her approach to the issues and appears
to listen to the concerns of the community. But I think there are still a lot
of opportunities for further reform in Harris County."
But Ogg said she cannot alone take credit for the recent drop in executions.
The trend precedes her slightly and can also be connected to better educated
and more diverse jury pools, as well as Texas' new sentencing option of life
without parole. The state also has a more skilled group of indigent defense
lawyers who build up mitigating circumstances - such as an abusive childhood or
mental illness - for an alleged murderer's crime.
Even a state like Texas might stop sentencing alleged killers to death in the
near future. And that trend could well extend nationwide.
"We've seen a deepening decline in the death penalty since the year 2000, and
some states fell faster than others," said University of Virginia law professor
Brandon Garrett, who wrote "End of Its Rope: How Killing the Death Penalty Can
Revive Criminal Justice." He added that the declines are steepest in counties
that had sentenced the most people to death.
"Juries are turning away from it, prosecutors are turning away from it, so [the
death penalty is] withering away on the vine whether courts or legislators
decide to do anything about it," Garrett said.
As for Ogg, she only said that she represents modern-day Harris County, not the
one made famous for the number of people it executed.
She said that her office still has more than 80 pending capital murder cases
and she'll examine each one thoroughly to decide whether the death penalty is
the most fitting punishment.
"With other sentencing options and with an increased knowledge of science and
technology, Americans feel responsible as jurors in a way they didn't in the
past because there's more information to be considered," she said. "So I think
attitudes toward the death penalty are changing."
(source: NBC News)
*********************
It's Debatable: Should death penalty be used more often?
This week, Arnold Loewy and Charles Moster debate states' use of the death
penalty. Moster is a former litigation attorney in the Ronald Reagan and George
H.W. Bush presidential administrations who has offices in Lubbock, Amarillo,
Midland/Odessa, Abilene and Georgetown, and Loewy is the George Killiam
Professor of Law at Texas Tech School of Law.
Loewy: States eliminating capital punishment
Our topic for today is whether states that have eliminated the death penalty
should re-establish it, and whether those who theoretically have it, but rarely
if ever use it, should invoke it with greater frequency. For me, these are easy
questions and the answer to both is clearly "no."
There are so many reasons that states have been eliminating capital punishment
that I may not be able to name them all in the allotted space. First, in recent
years without the benefit (or perhaps detriment) of the death penalty, the
national murder rate has dropped precipitously. Second, a number of states, New
Mexico for one, eliminated the death penalty because administering it was too
costly. Some may be surprised to learn that caring for a prisoner for the
duration of his life is less expensive than executing him, but the evidence is
there to support that.
But what about good old-fashioned retribution, "an eye for an eye" and all that
good stuff? Part of the problem is that we do not and constitutionally cannot
execute all murderers. Those few states that have maintained capital punishment
and even fewer that actually use it are limited to executing those, who
theoretically are the worst of the worst. But that is not what happens. The
major factors determining who is executed are the proclivities and
proficiencies of the prosecutor, the race of the victim (those who kill whites
are more likely to be executed than those who kill blacks), and finally, the
race of the defendant (blacks are more likely to be executed than whites).
All of this would be bad enough if we always got the question of guilt or
innocence right. But we don't. The reasons are well known and they include
misidentification by an eye witness, a coerced and untruthful confession (yes,
they do occur with alarming frequency), false testimony from an alleged
jailhouse snitch seeking to curry favor with those who could reduce his
sentence and junk science.
The last of these was responsible for the execution of a man from Texarkana,
named Cameron Todd Willingham. Willingham was accused of murdering his three
sleeping children by setting their house on fire while they slept, certainly a
crime which had he committed it would be death penalty-worthy in a state like
Texas that has the death penalty. The problem is that the forensic science,
which was sufficient to persuade the jury that he was guilty, was later
determined to be junk science. Although then-Gov. Rick Perry could have
commuted the sentence, he did not and Willingham was executed. I am not saying
that I know for sure that Willingham was innocent, but I do know for sure that
there was no credible evidence to prove that this man who protested his
innocence with his last breath was actually guilty.
Perhaps if there was some societal value to our killing people, we could
tolerate the killing of a few who are innocent (although if it were someone I
cared about, I might not feel so cavalier about it), but there isn't. People
living in states without capital punishment feel vindicated when the killer of
their loved one gets life without parole, whereas those in capital punishment
states, (e.g., Texas) are more likely to feel cheated when their loved one's
killer, as usually happens, does, does not get the death penalty.
Finally, most civilized democracies have rejected capital punishment
completely. These countries frequently refuse to extradite a capital escapee to
the United States because they refuse to be a part of a process in which an
individual is at risk of being executed by a government.
So, with no meaningful deterrent value, haphazard, at best, retribution and the
risk of executing an innocent person, it is no wonder that so many states have
decided that it is no longer appropriate to saddle their taxpayers with the
cost of continuing capital punishment.
Moster: Outraged by Manson's life term in prison
My stomach literally turned when it was reported that Charles Manson died of
natural causes in Bakersfield, California, at age 83 while serving out his life
sentence for the mass murders of 7 people, including actress Sharon Tate. The
26-year-old Tate was due to give birth to a son in 2 weeks and pleaded, "Please
don't kill me. I just want to have my baby." Tate was stabbed 16 times and died
in a pool of blood along with her unborn child.
Manson never denied these heinous acts and never showed any remorse. Manson was
originally sentenced to death, but his sentence was commuted to life with the
possibility of parole after California invalidated the state's death penalty
statute in 1972.
I am outraged that Manson could live out the remainder of his life with
excellent medical and dental care, lodging and 3 nutritious meals a day. I am
quite certain that Professor Loewy would agree that Manson's benefit package
was better than many hard-working Americans who fail to live out their
actuarial life expectancy. This is a disgrace, plain and simple.
I firmly believe that states that have eliminated the death penalty should
re-establish it and that it be administered with greater frequency. For the
faint of heart, be forewarned that I have no problem whatsoever with an
imperfect "death cocktail" causing extra suffering to these cold-blooded
murderers on the way out or even a few extra twitches in the electric chair.
These despicable monsters had no remorse for the pain they caused their victims
and the lasting torture visited upon their families and loved ones.
The professor is correct that caring for a prisoner for the duration of his
life may be less expensive than administering the death penalty. However, this
cost likely results from the cycle of endless and futile appeals which
overburden the legal system and tragically punish the victims by delaying the
final (and deserved) act. As discussed in a prior debate segment, I would
advocate that we eliminate the right of death penalty appeals in situations
where the evidence is incontrovertible. Manson's case would be a perfect
example where the evidence of the murderous rampage was indisputable, and the
defendants admitted guilt. Certainly, the rapid administration of the death
penalty would be less costly in these situations than fulfillment of a life
sentence.
As to the professor's concern regarding erroneous convictions, we need to
maintain and enhance safeguards in the current criminal justice system to allow
for the use of post-conviction evidence, particularly DNA. For purposes of this
discussion, I am advocating the reinstatement and administration of the death
penalty in those cases where the evidence is without dispute and/or the
defendant has admitted guilt. I see no logical or moral reason why justice
should be delayed in these cases.
Finally, I would assert that retribution is sufficient legal justification for
administering the death penalty. It is perfectly acceptable for society to
determine that certain acts be punished by death without any need for
elaboration.
Loewy: Which defendant gets term in prison, which is executed
Interestingly Moster's "stomach literally turned" at the thought of a
life-termer having died of natural causes in a maximum security prison, but his
stomach isn't bothered at all by the prospect of a state causing extra
suffering to a sentient human being who has been convicted of murder in the
process of killing him. Suffice it to say, I take our constitutional commitment
to end cruel and unusual punishments more seriously than that.
Ironically, in successive paragraphs toward the end of his commentary, Moster
advocates both reducing post-conviction remedies (perhaps a return to the bad
old days where we arrested someone on Monday, tried him on Tuesday and hung him
on Wednesday) and increasing them: "[W]e need to maintain and enhance
safeguards in the current criminal justice system to allow for the use of
post-conviction evidence, particularly DNA." The problem is ascertaining which
defendant gets the benefit of the protective procedures and which one get
summarily executed with Moster's shot of gratuitous pain for good measure.
To Moster, this is an easy question. He would say that "where the evidence is
without dispute and/or the defendant has admitted guilt," he should be killed
quickly and painfully. But how easy is that question? The very case that turned
his stomach is way more complex than he would allow. With the exception of the
testimony of the crazed killers and Manson's subsequent confession, we do not
know that he was guilty.
Now just how reliable is this evidence? No prosecutor of whom I am aware would
want to have to rely on the testimony of the crazed flower children who
actually perpetrated the murder. Of course, all of the forensic evidence points
to them, not Manson. As for Manson's admission, do we take the rants of a crazy
man seriously? Ordinarily we would not. So, is the evidence all that
"incontrovertible" or "without dispute?" I think not.
I am not saying that Manson was not guilty. I feel quite sure that he was. I am
saying that the concept of incontrovertible evidence is not a meaningful one
when someone???s life is at stake. For example, I am sure that in the
Willingham case, the prosecutor might well have told the jury that we have
incontrovertible scientific evidence that this fire was set intentionally. The
DA would, of course, have had no way of knowing that a few years later this
incontrovertible evidence would become controverted indeed.
In fact, the standard for proving guilt is, and for centuries has been, beyond
a reasonable doubt. So, if the jury was not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
they would not have convicted the defendant in the first place. Yet, based on
the number of death row exonorees, mistakes have been made and innocent men
have been sent to death row.
Perhaps some of the readership saw the 4 part mini-series on the Investigation
Discovery channel called "Killing Richard Glossip," which is the story of
Oklahoma's efforts to kill a man whose evidence of guilt is almost exclusively
the word of the actual murderer who was spared the death penalty if he would
testify against Glossip. Guess what, he did, and unlike the probably innocent
man on death row, the actual killer is not facing execution. Ironically,
Glossip was the primary plaintiff in the challenge to Oklahoma's method of
execution.
Finally, Moster's love of the death penalty seems partially predicated on his
belief of the pleasantness of life imprisonment in a maximum security prison.
As he puts it: "I am outraged that Manson could live out the remainder of his
life with excellent medical and dental care, lodging and 3 nutritious meals a
day." One would think that he was being sent to a high-end Hyatt, Hilton or
Marriott to live the remainder of his life in palatial splendor. Of course, no
such thing happens. Prisons are very unpleasant places and contrary to Moster's
supposition, I do not believe that Manson lived anywhere close to the standard
of almost all hard-working Americans. O. Henry might have made a living writing
about bums and drunkards who loved going to jail for a day to get a good hot
meal, but that is not what Charles Manson endured or Richard Glossip endures on
a daily basis.
Moster: Death appropriate to punish murderers
Contrary to the professor's rather ghoulish assertion, I do not have "a love
for the death penalty." That said, it is a perfectly appropriate and just
remedy to punish defendants who have been properly tried and convicted of
murder. It is a bizarre world, indeed, when we are making excuses or
justifications for the likes of Charles Manson whose conviction is questioned
by the professor - "With the exception of the crazed killers and Manson's
subsequent confession, we do not know that he was guilty." Did we hear
professor Loewy correctly? This guy was the personification of evil incarnate
and proudly proclaimed his role in the barbaric killings which shocked the
nation and the world. We must stop being apologists for mass murders and focus
on the rights of the victims who are truly the recipients of cruel and unusual
punishment by witnessing the coddling and protection of cold-blooded killers.
I do not see any inconsistency between my insistence of the rapid application
of the death penalty in specific cases where guilt is incontrovertible and the
safeguard of defendants' rights in other situations. The 1st category would be
applied to monsters just like Charles Manson, who displayed his murderous acts
as a badge of honor along with the Nazi tattoo on his brow. In such instances,
the evidence establishes incontrovertible guilt and is augmented by the
defendants??? confession. Upon the conclusion of the sentencing process, that
person should be put to death as quickly as the so-called cocktail can be
prepared and dispensed.
In other cases which would likely represent the majority of murder convictions,
the evidence is more attenuated and the possibility for legal error exists.
There, all legal protections, including appeals, must be preserved. I would
further allow for the expansive use of post-conviction evidence which could
exonerate a defendant, including DNA evidence and/or information proving that
prior evidence was tainted.
I agree with the professor that prison life is not akin to a high-end hotel,
however, the analogy is inapposite. The "high-end result" that these killers
are experiencing is the very ability to remain alive along with the creature
comforts denied to many hard-working Americans. It is time for the
reinstatement of the death penalty across the country and the adoption of
procedures to expedite its rapid delivery.
(source: Lubbock Avalanche-Journal)
*************************
Accused serial killer William Reece charged in death of 20-year-old Texas woman
A Texas man suspected in the cold-case killings of 2 women and 2 girls 20 years
ago now faces 4 murder charges.
William Lewis Reece, charged in the deaths of 19-year-old Tiffany Johnston,
17-year-old Jessica Cain and 12-year-old Laura Smither, has now been indicted
for capital murder in the kidnapping and killing of 20-year-old Kelli Cox. Her
remains were discovered outside Houston and identified last year.
Reece was already serving a 60-year prison sentence in Texas for kidnapping
when he led police to graves where Cain and Cox's remains were found.
All 4 victims disappeared over a 4-month period in 1997. Smither was from
Friendswood and Cain was from Tiki Island. Cox was from Denton, Texas, and
Johnston was from Oklahoma.
Oklahoma prosecutors have said they would seek the death penalty in the
Johnston killing, and Reece has pleaded not guilty.
(source: ABC News)
FLORIDA:
Judge bars death penalty in Boca Raton case that could test state law
Setting up what could be the 1st-ever test of part of Florida's new death
penalty laws, a Palm Beach County judge on Friday barred prosecutors from
seeking a death sentence in a Boca Raton murder case from May because they
missed a crucial filing deadline.
Circuit Judge John Kastrenakes' potential landmark ruling Friday in the case of
Tashane Chantiloupe comes just days after his attorney noted a similarly missed
deadline in an Osceola County murder case, which recently reignited a widely
publicized death penalty feud between Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Orlando-area
top prosecutor Aramis Ayala.
It has also triggered what could be months, if not years, of delays in the case
as local prosecutors challenge a 45-day deadline Florida lawmakers imposed this
past year for prosecutors to announce whether they will seek death sentences in
new cases after defendants are arraigned. The rule was part of a drastic
overhaul to Florida's death penalty system after the U.S. Supreme Court struck
down the old process as unconstitutional.
Chantiloupe, accused of killing 34-year-old Agustus Byam because Byam had
identified him as the shooter in a 2016 attempted murder case, was indicted and
arraigned in August on 1st-degree murder charges after Boca Raton Police say
they found his DNA on the murder weapon.
The 1st mention of the death penalty in court records came on Oct. 13, when
Assistant Public Defender Joseph Walsh noted that 56 days had passed since
Chantiloupe pleaded not guilty and preemptively asked Kastrenakes to keep
prosecutors from seeking the death penalty. While the new laws allow
prosecutors to revise an existing death penalty notice after 45 days, Walsh
argued, it provided no exceptions for missing the filing deadline.
"When the statute is clear, as this statute is, the court must apply its
meaning," Walsh wrote, adding that prosecutors' failure to quickly announce a
death-penalty pursuit violates a public defender's client's rights to
immediately have access to the proper attorneys and resources necessary for a
fair defense.
3 days later, on Oct. 16, Assistant State Attorney Aleathea McRoberts filed a
notice of Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg's intent to seek a
death sentence against Chantiloupe, and added that the 14-day filing delay
posed no harm to Chantiloupe's defense because she and Walsh had yet to begin
the process of trading evidence in the case.
And in a later request for Kastrenakes to keep prosecutors' death-penalty
pursuit alive, McRoberts said other states with similar filing deadlines, like
Washington, allow prosecutors to file death penalty notices later "if good
faith is shown."
"As an aside, if the legislature wished, it could have explicitly so stated in
the statute that failure to file the Notice within 45 days prohibits the State
from seeking the death penalty," McRoberts wrote, adding: "It did not do so and
this Court should not re-write the statute as the defense suggests."
In a 7-page written ruling following his pronounced order in court Friday,
Kastrenakes cited Montana, Nevada and New Mexico as other states where the law
allows exceptions to death penalty notice deadlines, but added that Nevada's
Supreme Court in particular ruled that prosecutors shouldn't be allowed to file
a late notice because of a mere oversight.
In his ruling, which could set the precedent for other death-penalty cases,
Kastrenakes agreed with McRoberts that allowing for the late filing would not
have violated Chantiloupe's rights. But, after noting that his ruling in
Chantiloupe's case is the 1st of its kind he knows of in the state, Kastrenakes
said Florida laws provided no exceptions to the rule.
"This Court believes that it would be wise for the courts of Legislature to
'read in' or proscribe a good faith exception to a delayed filing of the
State's Notice to Seek Death, especially where the defendant suffers no
prejudice, as herein. However, it is not for this Court to re-work, change or
fashion laws plainly promulgated by the people," Kastrenakes wrote in a
footnote to his ruling.
Until this past week, a similar test of the new law had been brewing in the
case of Emerita Mapp, a 33-year-old woman accused of slitting the throats of
Zackery Ganoe and Andrew Bickford after she robbed them at an Osceola County
Days Inn. Although Bickford survived the April attack, Ganoe died of his wounds
and authorities eventually charged Mapp with 1st-degree murder, a crime to
which she pleaded not guilty in late August.
At the end of October, Ayala announced her office would be seeking the death
penalty against Mapp, which would have made it the 1st death-penalty case her
office pursued since March, when she made the controversial announcement that
she would not be seeking the death penalty for cases in her circuit.
Gov. Scott responded by reassigning more than two dozen of her cases to
prosecutors in Ocala and Ayala sued him over it, sparking a legal battle that
ended up in Florida's Supreme Court. In September, Ayala walked back her death
penalty ban and dropped a federal suit against Scott after the state's high
court ruled against her.
Ayala said a death-penalty review panel she formed in the wake of the ruling
decided that Mapp's case warranted a death sentence, but her filing in late
October went well past the 45-day deadline. This prompted Gov. Scott's general
counsel, Daniel Nordby, to send her a scathing letter earlier this month,
saying the missed deadline at best "suggests negligence - and, at worst,
willful disregard - in the faithful performance of the duties of your
constitutional office."
"In any event, it is a clear disservice to the hardworking men and women of the
law enforcement agencies in your circuit and to the crime victims and their
families impacted by the offenses you are charged to prosecute," Nordby wore in
the Dec. 4 letter. "They deserve better."
Ayala subsequently fought attempts from Mapp's defense to bar them from seeking
the death penalty, and an Orlando judge had been set to hear arguments from
both sides on the matter earlier this week.
But points became moot a week ago, when Mapp accepted a plea agreement for a
life in prison sentence. Afterward, Ayala told The Orlando Sentinel that
prosecutors had extended the life in prison plea offer to Mapp before the
filing deadline had passed and had simply decided to honor the offer.
As for Chantiloupe, McRoberts made it clear in court Friday that she would be
appealing Kastrenakes' decision. Kastrenakes set the next hearing in
Chantiloupe's murder case in March, acknowledging that the case would not be
able to go to trial until a higher court decides the appeal.
(source: Palm Beach Post)
************
Death penalty prosecution: How nearby districts compare to Orange-Osceola----6
death notices filed in 5th Circuit, 3 in 7th Circuit , 4 in 18th Circuit
There has been a lot of finger-pointing between Gov. Rick Scott and
Orange-Osceola State Attorney Aramis Ayala when it comes to the death penalty.
News 6 investigator Louis Bolden took a closer look at how neighboring judicial
circuits compare to Ayala's rate of seeking capital punishment.
In March, Ayala announced her office would not seek capital punishment in any
case prosecuted by her office. In response, Scott reassigned more than
two-dozen potential death penalty cases to neighboring Fifth Judicial District
State Attorney Brad King. Ayala unsuccessfully sued the governor, claiming he
overstepped his authority by removing cases from her office.
After a legal battle with the governor and a Florida Supreme Court ruling in
Scott's favor, Ayala formed a death penalty review panel. Seven prosecutors
reviewed the facts of each first-degree murder case to determine if it warrants
the death penalty and the panel had to be unanimous, according to Ayala.
News 6 legal analyst Steven Kramer said Ayala needed to set up a panel to
regain credibility after initially saying her office would not seek the death
penalty in any of its cases.
"From a practical legal perspective, this is probably a smart and sophisticated
move, setting up this panel," Kramer said.
Since that change, the Ninth Judicial State Attorney's Office has filed 3
"notices of intent to seek death," which is not far from the number of death
notices filed in neighboring judicial circuits, records show.
In the 18th Judicial Circuit, which includes Brevard and Seminole counties the
state attorney has filed four death notices. Three have been filed in the
Seventh District of Flagler and Volusia, and six have been filed by King's
office in the Fifth Circuit of Lake, Marion and Sumter counties.
For comparison, in the Fifth District of Lake, Marion and Sumter, there were 29
murder-related arrests recorded last year, 19 murder arrests in the Seventh
District of Flagler and Volusia, 80 murder arrests in the Ninth Judicial
District of Orange and Osceola counties and 28 murder arrests in the 18th
District of Brevard and Seminole counties, according to the 2016 Florida
Department of Law Enforcement annual crime report.
According to the data, the districts with higher populations net more murder
arrests, which could also mean more 1st-degree murder cases prosecuted by state
attorneys.
Some of the death notices filed by King's office include cases reassigned by
Scott from Ayala's office.
King and 18th Judicial Circuit State Attorney Phil Archer spoke to News 6 about
how their offices determine to seek death in first-degree murder cases. Both
said they meet with homicide prosecutors about potential capital punishment
cases, but that they ultimately make the final decision whether their offices
will seek the death penalty.
(source: WKMG news)
LOUISIANA----female to face death penalty
State will also seek death penalty for Ebony Sonnier
The State of Louisiana will seek the death penalty for Ebony Sonnier, the
sister of Matthew Sonnier, for her alleged role in the murders of Kendrick
Horn, Jeremy Norris and Latish White back in October in Rapides Parish.
Earlier this week, Matthew Sonnier pleaded "not guilty" to 3 counts of 1st
degree murder, obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, and carrying of a
firearm by a convicted felon. He is being represented by Thomas Alonzo, a
capital attorney in Lafayette.
Prosecutor Hugo Holland tells News Channel 5 that he will file the notice to
seek the death penalty for Ebony Sonnier within the coming weeks. A notice to
seek the death penalty for Matthew Sonnier has already been filed.
Holland will prosecute the case for Ebony Sonnier as well. There's no word yet
on who her capital attorney will now be.
Matthew Sonnier's next court appearance is set for February.
(source: KALB news)
OHIO:
Attorney wants out of North Ridgeville murder case
A Parma man who could face the death penalty for the murder of a North
Ridgeville man was arraigned Thursday, but there is now question of who will
defend him in court.
John Rowan, 37, appeared in county Common Pleas Court for his arraignment on
charges of aggravated murder, kidnapping, felonious assault, abuse of a corpse
and other charges. Rowan pleaded not guilty to all counts on the 16-count
indictment and asked to have legal counsel appointed.
Common Pleas Judge Chris Cook, who handled the arraignment and whose court the
case was assigned, appointed defense attorney Kreig Brusnahan, who is state
certified and on the Supreme Court's list as being a first-seat trial lawyer
for capital cases. Nick Hanek, who was appointed to represent Rowan in the
lower court, also was kept on as part of Rowan's legal representation.
After the indictment was read in full, Rowan - by way of his attorney - threw
the judge a curveball.
"Mr. Rowan has indicated that he does not wish to waive his statutory time for
speedy trial," Brusnahan said during the proceeding. "I will not accept an
appointment knowing full well that there's no way that any effective counsel,
or any reasonable counsel that is certified to do death penalty work, can
possibly prepare for trial in such a serious matter in 90 days."
Brusnahan asked to be removed from the case.
"I certainly am not going to be able to prepare this case," Brusnahan said. "It
would be borderline malpractice for me to tell you I could try this case in 90
days."
Cook refused to remove Brusnahan from the case, though, saying he personally
selected counsel to handle the case because of his "knowledge of their
experience and reputation."
Cook scheduled a pretrial for 1:30 p.m. today to discuss the matter further.
"I want Mr. Rowan to have an opportunity to think this matter through, to
perhaps talk a little further with his attorneys and to see if this is the
decision he really wants to make. If it is, and he continues to express his
desire to exercise his constitutional right to a speedy trial, we will
accommodate him; we will find new counsel, if necessary. We'll get a hold of
the state of Ohio's public defender's office, if necessary."
Jonathan Witmer-Rich, a professor of law at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law,
said finding a qualified attorney to represent Rowan for a trial that could
take place in 30 days could be difficult.
"The defendant has a right to a speedy trial, both under the Ohio Speedy Trial
Act and then Ohio and federal constitutions, so it's not like he's out of line
for not waiving his right," Witmer-Rich said. "It is going to be difficult to
find somebody to take the case, but they need to find somebody. That's not a
right that you can just kind of ignore because it's a complicated case."
Witmer-Rich said he can understand why Brusnahan might be leery of taking on
the case if Rowan sticks to that time mandate.
"Capital cases are always incredibly time-consuming," he said. "The standards
for the amount of work you need to do to prepare are really very, very high. It
always depends, of course, on the particular facts of the case. The
expectations in death penalty cases are very high for defense counsel."
Rowan arrested in October for allegedly killing Harold Litten, 60. Litten was
reported missing April 18 by family members and his employer when he failed to
show up for work, according to North Ridgeville police.
Detectives found Litten's body in an outbuilding at his home at 5490 Jaycox
Road, on May 26 during a prearranged search of the property after several
previous searches of the home turned up nothing.
Cook also changed Rowan's bond, which was set at $2 million by the lower court,
to there being no bond, saying that the lower court set the initial bond prior
to the case being indicted as a death penalty-eligible case.
(source: The Chronicle-Telegram)
********************
Death penalty abolishment in front of OH lawmakers, again
For the 4th time in a row, State Representative Nickie Antonio from Cuyahoga
County has introduced legislation at the Statehouse that would abolish the
death penalty.
Her 3 previous attempts have been relatively fruitless in starting a debate
about the issue at the Statehouse.
This time Antonio is hoping for a deeper dialog with members of the House
Criminal Justice Committee the bill has been assigned to.
As was the case last year, at least one Republican has already agreed to be a
co-sponsor on the bill, but unlike abortion, capital punishment is not
necessarily a partisan issue.
House Bill 389 was given its 1st hearing this week, and Antonio hopes it will
receive at least 2 more; 1 for supporters of the measure and 1 for opponents.
Antonio says now is a perfect time for both sides to take another look at
capital punishment, how it has been handled in recent years and the trends
being seen nationally; given recent events connected to the topic.
It will be up to State Representative Nathan Manning from Lorain County near
Cleveland whether the bill will receive any more hearings or if he plans to let
it languish in committee for the next year.
Meanwhile, an attorney for Brian Golsby has filed a motion to put his trial on
hold.
Golsby is accused of kidnapping, raping, and murdering Reagan Tokes, and faces
the death penalty.
The argument is that if Antonio's bill passes into law then the prosecution
could not seek the death penalty in the case, so he wants the judge to put it
on hold until the bill can be resolved.
However, one does not simply resolve a piece of legislation, and it is possible
that Antonio's bill just sits there in the House Criminal Justice Committee for
the next 12 months without any more movement.
At the end of the session, on December 31, 2018, the bill could fulfill one
kind of resolution by failing.
According to Golsby's attorney, the judge has not yet ruled on his motion.
Antonio had no idea her bill was cited in this motion to stay, and when told
about it she chose not to discuss Golsby's case.
Antonio did say, "There are people who have committed monstrous, monstrous
things; and they should be punished to the full extent of the law."
She says those people should spend the rest of their natural-born life in
prison, where they will have to wake up every day and look at themselves in the
mirror and wonder, 'what have I done.'
She hopes those individuals suffer for a great length of time wrestling with
that guilt, and says law abiding citizens should not stoop to the criminal's
level and kill; that they should take the high road instead.
She also says several victims' families support her efforts because of the
emotional toll the lengthy and frequent appeals process takes on them.
"Nothing we do will ever bring back their loved one, but they could at least
have closure knowing that they person who took their loved one away will spend
the rest of their life behind bars." said Antonio.
(source: WCMH news)
ARKANSAS:
Arkansas Parole Board releases former death row inmate Timothy Howard
An Ashdown, Arkansas man is freed from death row after 2 decades of maintaining
his innocence in the murder of a Little River County couple and attempted
murder of their child.
Timothy Howard was released from prison 20 years to the day that Brian and
Shannon Day were discovered at separate crime scenes.
Brian was shot and dumped inside a U-haul truck.
His wife, Shannon, was found strangled inside their home.
The couple's baby was found inside a duffle bag with a cord around his neck,
injured but alive.
Howard was sentenced to 2 death sentences in 1999.
His convictions were thrown out in 2013.
Then in 2015, a new trial for Howard was ordered after the Arkansas Supreme
Court ruled that the lab compromised DNA samples.
Prosecuting attorney Bryan Chesshir represented the case 18-years later, and
says there shouldn't have been questions regarding DNA.
He says the evidence was irrefutable.
"The person who testified for the DNA testified that the only way it couldn't
have been him was if it had been a sibling with identical DNA," said Chesshir.
In the second trial, Howard was convicted on lesser charges of second degree
murder and attempted second degree murder and sentenced to 38 years in prison.
He was denied parole in 2015, but released last Wednesday after 20 years behind
bars, where most of that time was spent on death row.
Howard is currently on maximum suspension, which requires employment, periodic
drug testing, no association with the victim or the victim's family and
obedience to a curfew.
(source: KTBS news)
****************
Arkansas executed more people than all but 1 other state
23 people were executed last year, the 2nd-lowest number since 1991, according
to a new report from the Death Penalty Information Center. Yet Arkansas bucked
that trend. The state successfully killed 4 men in April, which ranks Arkansas
only behind Texas in terms of the number of people executed. Texas killed 7 men
in 2017. Florida and Alabama each executed 3 inmates on death row.
The report also notes that death penalty support is at the lowest level in 45
years and that new death sentences (projected to be 39 for the year of 2017)
are at "the 2nd lowest annual total since the U.S. Supreme Court declared the
death penalty unconstitutional in 1972."
Arkansas also planned what would've been a 5th execution - and 9th planned for
2017 - when, just 4 months after saying that the executions in April needed to
be held closely together because of the expiration of the controversial
sedative midazolam, the state acquired more of the drug. The planned killing of
Jack Gordon Greene was also stayed, as the Arkansas Supreme Court continues to
determine the constitutionality of the role of the Arkansas Department of
Correction's director in determining mental competency to be executed.
As the report notes, many executions are planned that never happen: "States
scheduled 81 executions in 2017, but 58 of them - more than 70 % - were never
carried out."
Moving forward, there is still debate on whether or not the April executions
were "botched." Media witnesses and lawyers said that the execution of Kenneth
Williams, the last of the 4 men to be killed, lurched and convulsed -
indicating an improper execution - but state officials said nothing went wrong.
The way media witnesses view executions and the design of lethal injection as a
method (which includes a paralytic), as we've written about, makes it difficult
to determine if pain is felt by prisoners during an execution.
(source: arktimes.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
