Sept. 1
TEXAS:
Texas hasn't executed anyone in 148 days. That's a new record.
It's been 148 days since Texas executed someone - a remarkable lull in the use
of the death penalty for a state that has killed far more people than any
other.
In the nearly 5 months since Pablo Vasquez was killed by lethal injection on
April 6, execution after execution in the state has been canceled. In fact,
there hasn't been a gap between Texas executions this long since June 2008,
according to state records. That gap happened when the Supreme Court
temporarily halted the death penalty nationwide during a case on the
constitutionality of lethal injection.
The 2016 hiatus is, in part, a sign of the decline of the death penalty in the
Lone Star State. Since 1976, Texas has executed 537 people - more than the next
top 6 states combined. At its peak in 2000, the state had 40 executions, more
than 1 every other week. That's gradually declined over the years; in 2015,
Texas executed 13 people.
The lull in executions also comes as more judges, public officials and ordinary
citizens are speaking out about the questionable practices in some of the
state's death penalty convictions.
"Texans are stepping back from this most irreversible punishment," said Kathryn
Kase, the executive director of Texas Defender Services, a nonprofit law firm
that defends death row inmates. "More and more people are expressing concerns
about the way Texas has used the death penalty ... We all benefit from going
more slowly on this."
The state's execution-free summer was caused by a string of scheduled
executions that were stayed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest
criminal court in the state. Since Vasquez was killed, the Court has heard
last-minute appeals from five men scheduled to be executed, and in each case
ruled that the execution must be called off. "Cases that would have
historically been given a green light with just a cursory glance are now being
given more scrutiny," said Kristin Houle, the executive director of the Texas
Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty.
While each of the inmates' lives were spared for different reasons, each stay
underscores the variety of flaws in the state's handling of the death penalty.
The men were:
--Charles Flores, who was scheduled to die on June 2 and won a stay on May 27.
His execution was stayed over his claim that police officers improperly
hypnotized the key eyewitness in the case.
--Robert Roberson, who was scheduled to die June 21 and won a stay on June 16
because of new scientific evidence discounting the "shaken baby" theory that
led to his conviction.
--Robert Pruett, who was scheduled to die August 23 and won a stay on August 11
while the court considered whether more DNA testing was necessary.
--Jeff Wood, who was scheduled to die August 24 and won a stay on August 19 due
to improper expert testimony during his trial. His case attracted national
attention because he didn't actually kill anybody; he was involved in a robbery
when his accomplice shot and killed a store clerk.
--Rolando Ruiz, who was scheduled to die Wednesday and won a stay last week
Friday based on his claim that his previous lawyer was incompetent.
In addition, Perry Williams, who was scheduled to die July 14, had his
execution called off after the state failed to meet a deadline for testing of
its execution drugs ordered by a separate federal court. 3 other inmates, Terry
Edwards, Ramiro Gonzalez, and Tai'chin Preyor, had their executions postponed
for procedural reasons.
While the Court of Criminal Appeals has historically had a reputation of being
conservative and ruling against defendants, some observers say there has been a
change in tone over the last few months. Anti-death penalty activists and
lawyers point to the influence of Judge Elsa Alcala, who's become a strong
voice criticizing Texas executions. In June, Alcala - the only nonwhite judge
on the Court - wrote a powerful opinion questioning the constitutionality of
the death penalty. She's been a part of the majority opinions staying all 6 of
the recent executions.
"She is a thorn in the sides of all the [pro-death penalty] justices who sit up
there in Austin," said Pat Hartwell, a longtime anti-capital punishment
activist in Houston. "We have been waiting for years for a sitting judge to do
this."
At the same time that executions in the state have flatlined, Texas juries have
sent only 2 new inmates to death row so far in 2016, and sent only 3 inmates in
all of 2015 - far fewer than in previous years.
"The innocence cases have really shaken people, the forensic science errors
that have been discussed, and just the repeated drumbeat of stories about the
overall of the failures in how the death penalty is carried out, it's caused
people to stop and reflect," Kase said. "They don't like what they see."
Spokespeople for the Texas Attorney General's office and the state prison
system declined to comment.
The decline in executions and death sentences in Texas mirrors a wider decrease
in the use of the death penalty across the country. The number of death
sentences in the U.S. in 2015 was the lowest since 1991, and will likely be
even lower this year. Many other states are currently unable to execute anyone:
Arizona and Arkansas lack any execution drugs, Oklahoma has enacted a
moratorium following the botched execution, and Florida and Alabama are dealing
with a Supreme Court ruling that seems to invalidate their policy of allowing
judges to sentence a defendant to death instead of juries.
Still, Texas remains in many ways the center of capital punishment in America.
6 of the 15 people executed around the country so far in 2016 are from the Lone
Star State, as were 13 of the 28 people executed in 2015. And polls still show
that large majorities of Texans support the death penalty, although it's down
from past years.
There are currently 4 executions scheduled to take place in the state over the
next few months. The next inmate on the list, Robert Jennings, is scheduled to
die September 14. Jennings' attorneys have already filed a motion asking the
top court for a stay.
(source: fusion.net)
FLORIDA:
Judge rules Mark Sievers can keep his 2 attorneys
Mark Sievers will be allowed to keep his 2 attorneys as lead counsel on his
1st-degree murder trial - for now at least.
Lee Circuit Judge Bruce Kyle reserved a ruling Thursday morning on whether or
not attorneys Michael Mummert and Antonio Faga will be able to represent
Sievers, who could face the death penalty if he is found guilty of
orchestrating the murder of his wife, Bonita Springs Dr. Teresa Sievers, in
June 2015.
Neither Mummert nor Faga has extensive experience with murder trials and
neither is qualified to lead death penalty cases. Kyle could rule that Mummert
and Faga bring on a death penalty qualified attorney to be Sievers' lead
representation on the case.
"It's crucial that an attorney with that kind of experience to be present at
the selection of the jury because of the dichotomy that sometimes occurs when
you are arguing one thing at trial and if you get the death you might be
arguing the opposite," Kyle said. "That makes picking the jury that much more
important."
During Sievers' case management hearing, Kyle questioned both Mummert and Faga
about their experience handling murder cases, their caseloads and their
understanding of death penalty trial procedures. He also questioned Sievers,
warning him that mistakes could be made and telling him that he could not use
his attorneys' inexperience to protest if the ruling doesn't go his way.
When asked if he still wanted Mummert and Faga to represent him, Sievers said
"yes sir."
Investigators believe Sievers orchestrated the killing of his 46-year-old wife,
who was found bludgeoned to death at the couple's Bonita Springs home. Sievers'
lifelong friend Curtis Wayne Wright Jr., who is accused of carrying out the
homicide with another co-defendant, Jimmy Ray Rodgers, has pleaded to
2nd-degree murder and has flipped on Sievers.
The lead detective in the case has previously said money was the motivation for
the homicide. Teresa Sievers had about $4.43 million in life insurance policies
in her name.
(source: Naples Daily News)
MISSOURI:
Reporter sues Missouri prison for not letting him witness executions of inmates
on death row
A reporter whose stories have been critical of Missouri's death penalty
procedures sued the state's prisons chief Wednesday in federal court, accusing
him of wrongly excluding him from being an execution witness.
The American Civil Liberties Union's lawsuit filed on behalf of Buzzfeed News
reporter Christopher McDaniel asks a judge to block anyone other than
Missouri's attorney general from serving as an execution witness until
McDaniel's due-process claims are decided. None of the 25 Missouri death row
inmates had been scheduled for execution as of Wednesday.
McDaniel, a former reporter for St. Louis public radio, applied in January 2014
to witness a Missouri execution ???to ensure that executions are carried out in
a constitutional manner,??? according to the lawsuit. But McDaniel never got a
response, and 17 executions have been carried out by the state since. George
Lombardi, who heads the state Department of Corrections, has "unfettered
discretion" in deciding who, according to state law, may be among the at least
"8 reputable citizens" to witness an execution, according to the lawsuit.
David Owen, a Missouri Department of Corrections spokesman, told The Associated
Press by email that the department doesn't publicly discuss pending litigation.
Neither Nanci Gonder, a spokeswoman for the attorney general, nor Scott Holste,
a spokesman for the governor, responded to requests for comment.
The lawsuit contends that McDaniel's "unfavourable" reporting about the way
Missouri executes prisoners may explain why he hasn't been allowed to witness
an execution. McDaniel's stories since December 2013 have called into question
such matters as how the state obtains its execution drugs and the state's
method of giving condemned inmates sedatives before their executions.
State records obtained by the ACLU through a May 2014 public records request
and eventual litigation showed that applicants to be execution witnesses were
denied if they "expressed a desire to ensure that executions were carried out
properly and constitutionally," the lawsuit alleges.
"Execution witnesses are an important check to ensure the department does not
abuse its power. That check does not work when the department can choose to
exclude anyone critical of its behaviour," Tony Rothert, the ACLU of Missouri's
legal chief, said in a statement.
Missouri has executed more prisoners than any state except Texas in recent
years. It has executed 19 prisoners since November 2013, including 6 last year.
The only one this year came in May, when 66-year-old Earl Forrest was put to
death for the 2002 killings of 2 people in a drug dispute and a sheriff's
deputy in a subsequent shootout.
(source: Associated Press)
NEBRASKA:
Johnson says Ricketts ignores his ag leadership
Reacting to Gov. Pete Ricketts' endorsement of his legislative opponent, Sen.
Jerry Johnson of Wahoo said Wednesday he finds it "frustrating that the
governor is trying to throw away my leadership for agriculture" and make the
nonpartisan Legislature "more of a partisan body."
Johnson is chairman of the Legislature's Agriculture Committee.
"I have worked with the governor on growing Nebraska agriculture and supported
legislation that is good for Nebraska agriculture and the state of Nebraska,
especially in my district," he said during a telephone interview responding to
Ricketts' endorsement of Bruce Bostelman of Brainard.
That endorsement represents "overreach by the executive branch," Johnson said.
Both Johnson and Bostelman are Republicans, as is the governor.
In his endorsement, Ricketts said that "we can count on (Bostelman) to oppose
illegal immigration, protect public safety and hold the line on taxes."
Johnson has voted to raise the gas tax, grant driver's licenses to young
immigrants who were brought into the United States illegally by their parents
when they were children, and repeal the death penalty.
Those young immigrants have been accorded legal presence in the U.S., Johnson
noted.
As he processed continuing reaction from Nebraskans during the interval between
his vote to repeal the death penalty and the subsequent motion to override the
governor's veto, Johnson said he decided to vote to sustain the veto and went
to Ricketts to inform him of his support.
Johnson said the governor phoned him a week ago to alert him that he would be
endorsing his opponent.
"I was disappointed," the senator said.
Johnson said he grew up on a farm and has served 6 years in city government,
including 4 years as mayor of Wahoo, and four years in the Legislature and
provides an experienced voice.
Although he ran second to Bostelman in the May primary election, Johnson said
he remains confident that voters in his district "will make the right call for
Nebraska agriculture" in November.
(source: Lincoln Journal Star)
IDAHO:
Death penalty takes center stage
Kootenai County prosecutors cleared several hurdles Wednesday in their pursuit
of the death penalty for the man accused of murdering Coeur d'Alene Police Sgt.
Greg Moore.
Jonathan Renfro, a 26-year-old Rathrdum resident who allegedly admitted to
killing Moore in a Coeur d'Alene neighborhood on May 15, 2015, was dressed in a
red and white striped prison jumpsuit Wednesday morning as he listened to
Kootenai County Public Defender John Adams challenge the prosecution's
challenging the prosecutorial decision. Adams argued before Kootenai County
District Court Judge Lansing Haynes that he should have access to information
he believes will prove the prosecutor's office is financially motivated to
pursue the death of Renfro, and that the list of 3 "aggravating factors" the
prosecution intends to use to potentially persuade a jury in its favor, are
unfounded.
Adams called several county officials to explain how capital cases are funded.
His goal was to persuade Haynes that he should order the release of information
detailing county expenditures on the cases.
Kootenai County Clerk Jim Brannon was the 1st public official Adams called to
testify. After asking Brannon to explain his duties as clerk, Adams asked him
to give the total amount the prosecutor's office has spent prosecuting the
Renfro case.
That question triggered the first of many objections from Kootenai County
Deputy Prosecutor Jed Whitaker, who told Haynes that Adams' entire line of
questioning was inappropriate. Haynes denied the objection and Brannon
responded by stating he was unsure what the public defender was asking.
"It says $0," Adams replied, citing documentation provided to both sides prior
to the hearing.
Adams then turned to a line item in the prosecution's budget set aside for
hiring expert witnesses this year. According to Brannon, the prosecutor's
office was budgeted $8,655 to hire such witnesses, but has spent more than
$92,000.
"Where'd that money come from?" Adams asked, triggering another objection from
Whitaker which was also denied. "How does a department spend more money than is
allocated?"
"A department head who is going to go over its budget can go to commissioners
and ask for more," Brannon said, adding that he is not involved in that
process.
When asked by Adams how much Kootenai County has received since Oct. 1, 2013,
from Idaho's Capital Crimes Defense Fund - established by the Legislature to
allow counties to dip into a statewide fund to recoup some of the costs
associated with death penalty trials - Brannon replied that the amount was
$217,498.78. The county clerk added that the funds go into a "justice fund,"
but he could not answer whether any of the money goes to the prosecutor's
office.
After the defense briefly questioned Kootenai County Treasurer Steve Matheson,
County Commissioner Dave Stewart was called to the stand. Adams questioned the
commissioner about some $50,000 in additional funding that was requested by the
prosecutor's office to hire expert witnesses during their pursuit of the death
penalty in the Angel Morales case.
Morales admitted in January to killing his wife and step-daughter as part of a
plea deal that took the death penalty off the table. He received two life
sentences.
"When asked for another $50,000, did you say anything about (moving the funds
from) other line items?" Adams asked.
"I don't recall," Stewart replied.
"So the $50,000 would be of benefit because you gave them extra money and they
didn't have to use other line item funds?" Adams asked, which prompted Stewart
to ask for time to review documents.
"He had financial benefits in doing this," Adams said after Stewart had
reviewed the documents.
"I do not believe I am qualified to answer that," Stewart replied.
Commissioner Dan Green was the final public official called to testify. Green,
who also serves on the board of directors for the CCDF, was asked by Adams if
he recalls a discussion during a CCDF board meeting where Green allegedly said
the prosecutor's office considers funding when deciding whether to pursue the
death penalty.
Green replied that he did not recall making the statement, but did not deny
making it. After allowing Green to look at the minutes from the meeting, Adams
asked the commissioner the same question.
"I don't remember," Green replied.
In his formal arguments following testimony, Adams told Haynes he is asking for
the judge to require county officials to document what funds are being used to
prosecute Renfro. Adams alleged that, since he believes the funding comes from
outside the prosecutor's office budget, there are outside forces at play that
prompted pursuit of the death penalty. He added that those outside forces
violate Renfro's constitutional rights.
"I think we've made a showing that there's money at work here," Adams said.
"We're all entitled to know where the money is coming from."
Kootenai County Deputy Prosecutor David Robbins argued Adams did not give any
evidence to support his claims that the prosecutor's office is financially
motivated, and that money is not reason enough to "disturb a prosecutorial
decision." Haynes agreed with Robbins and denied Adams' motion for county
documentation.
During the hearing, Haynes also heard arguments from Adams on a motion
challenging the addition of three "aggravating factors" which are used by
prosecutors when arguing to sentence a defendant to death. Adams referred to a
document filed by the prosecutor's office in January that made its intent to
pursue the death penalty official. Attempted burglary, attempted robbery, and
propensity to kill are factors Kootenai County Prosecutor Barry McHugh filed a
motion to add.
"Walking down the street does not mean he is attempting burglary," Adams said,
adding that he believes the prosecution is "stretching facts and the law."
Adams then argued that to add attempted robbery to the list, intent must be
established prior to the offense occurring. Renfro, he said, did not intend to
take his license back from Moore after allegedly shooting the officer.
Furthermore, Adams said Renfro couldn't steal his license because it is his
property.
"This is the kind of stuff you fail the Bar Exam for," Adams said. "This is
stretched beyond pale."
Finally, Adams said it cannot be proven that Renfro has a fondness for killing,
and allegations that his client lied to an investigator does not count as
evidence of the man's desire to murder.
Robbins countered Adams' arguments by saying the prosecution's motion to add
the 3 factors does not mean the court needs to determine if there is evidence
of such factors. The only determination the court needs to make, Robbins said,
is whether the prosecution is acting "in bad faith" in making the motion.
Haynes agreed with Robbins and granted the prosecution's motion to add the 3
aggravating factors.
The judge is scheduled to rule on an additional motion during a hearing on
Sept. 19.
(source: Bonner County Daily Bee)
WASHINGTON:
The Power of Story: A Conversation About the Death Penalty
This September the North Olympic Library System (NOLS), in partnership with
Humanities Washington, will host a multifaceted conversation about capital
punishment in the United States. Educator, writer and activist Dorothy Van
Soest - a lecturer with the Humanities Washington Speakers Bureau - will lead
this free, engaging discussion at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 7, at the Forks
Library.
The Power of Story
Capital punishment has given rise to considerable differences of opinion in
U.S. society. When a moratorium on executions in Washington was announced in
February 2014 by Gov. Jay Inslee, it sparked a national debate. Author and
educator Dorothy Van Soest will facilitate an interactive group dialogue about
the death penalty and demonstrate how the issue is multi-faceted by weaving
together personal connections, scientific research, life experience and
creative storytelling. Van Soest also will share stories of ordinary people
facing extraordinary situations, and how they have found the courage to
transform themselves and the world around them.
Van Soest is Professor Emeritus and a former dean at the University of
Washington. A writer, social worker and activist, she has published nine books
and more than 50 journal articles, essays and book chapters that tackle complex
issues related to violence, oppression and injustice. Her 2014 novel, "Just
Mercy," personalizes the topic of the death penalty as told through the
perspective of a family. The book was informed by her widely acclaimed
investigation of the lives of 37 men executed by Texas in 1997 and inspired by
the Texas Department of Criminal Justice's Victim Offender Restorative
Mediation Dialogue program. Van Soest holds an undergraduate degree in English
literature and a master's and Ph.D. in social work. For more information, visit
the author's website at http://dorothyvansoest.com.
For more about the Humanities Washington Speakers Bureau, visit
www.humanities.org/programs/speakers.
(source: Forks Forum)
USA:
3,000 Prospective Jurors To Be Considered For Charleston Church Shooting
Trial----The South Carolina court has begun jury selection in the federal death
penalty trial of Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof.
3000 South Carolina residents have been informed that they are being considered
as potential jurors in the federal death penalty case against Charleston church
shooter Dylann Roof, scheduled to start later this year.
After the announcement that the Department of Justice (DOJ) would seek the
death penalty against Roof, the court indicated that it was considering calling
1,200 to 1,500 people. But in a filing this week, the DOJ stated that double
the original amount of potential jurors had been sent summonses.
The announcement came in an order published by Judge Richard Gergel stating
that a hearing to discuss a motion to suppress certain evidence by the
defendant. The hearing is scheduled for Thursday, behind closed doors with the
public and the media barred from hearing the arguments.
In his order, Gergel wrote that any publicity from Thursday's hearing on
evidence could unfairly influence potential jurors.
Media outlets filed motions with the court to have the hearing open to public.
They contend that any juror who made determinations about the case based on
pretrial articles could be eliminated from the juror pool during the jury
selection process.
Gergel ultimately concluded that this case is one of the "rare instances" where
the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights to a fair trial outweighed the First
Amendment rights of the media and public to learn about the evidence that Roof
is seeking to keep out at trial.
Gergel also noted that while 3,000 potential jurors have been notified that
they might decide the case, he hasn't had the chance to instruct them to avoid
media coverage. And because of the wide interest in this case, Gergel says that
it is highly likely that potential jurors will consume media coverage about the
case between now and the start of the trial.
"There are simply some instances where the bell cannot be unrung," Gergel
writes. "This is not an instance where the public's awareness of news is
overestimated and jury panels are likely to be unaware of media spotlights."
Later this month, potential jurors will be asked to report to the Charleston
courthouse to complete questionnaires to start the screening process for the
jury. The questions that will be asked during this stage of jury selection have
been sealed by the court. After that, individual questioning of potential
jurors will begin in early November.
The judge is hoping that jury selection will be completed in November with the
trial tentatively scheduled to start in December and last about a month.
(source: BuzzFeedNews)
_______________________________________________
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
