March 1
TEXAS:
Harris County's juvenile offenders on death row
-Efrain Perez. Convicted in the June 1993 abduction, rape and murder of
teenagers Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena as part of a gang initiation.
He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 29 now.
-Raul Villarreal. Also convicted in the June 1993 abduction, rape and
murder of teenagers Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena. He was 17 at the
time of the offense and is 29 now.
-Robert Acuna. Convicted of murdering 2 elderly neighbors, James and Joyce
Caroll, at their Baytown home in November 2003. He was 17 at the time of
the offense and is 19 now.
-Tony Tyrone Dixon. Convicted of shooting and killing dentist Elizabeth
Ann Peavy during a May 1994 carjacking outside a southwest Houston
convenience store. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 28 now.
-Johnnie Bernal. Convicted of shooting Lee Dilley in the back during an
August 1994 holdup outside a northside ice house. The victim was trying to
run away. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 28 now.
-Michael Lopez. Convicted of murdering deputy constable Michael Eakin
after he and some friends were stopped for speeding on the Hardy Toll Road
in September 1998. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 23 now.
-Geno Wilson. Convicted of shooting door-to-door salesman James White in
the back of the head in December 1998 because he didn't have any money to
hand over. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 23 now.
-Edward Capetillo. Convicted of killing Matt Vickers and Kimberly
Williamson at a Champions Park home in January 1995. Prosecutors said he
and others had been hoping to rob 19-year-old Vickers of an insurance
settlement. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 27 now.
-Mark Sam Arthur. Convicted of killing Esequiel Fonseca, husband of his
middle-aged lover, in December 1996 as Fonseca drove home from work on
Beltway 8. He was 17 at the time of the offense and is 25 now.
-Son Tran. Gang member convicted of killing Ray Salazar and Quan Hoang in
October 1997 to cover up another murder. He was 17 at the time of the
offense and is 24 now.
-Nanon Williams. Convicted in the death of Adonius Collier, who was gunned
down during a Hermann Park drug deal in May 1992. He was 17 at the time of
the offense and is 30 now.
(source: Houston Chronicle)
**************************************
Ruling spares 2 from Bexar County
Today's Supreme Court ruling on the execution of killers who were under 18
at the time of their crime affects 28 inmates on Texas' death row.
2 -- Randy Arroyo and Leo Gordon Little -- are from Bexar County.
While the victims' families could not be immediately reached for comment,
Little's mother issued a brief statement through her son's attorney
Scottie Sullivan.
"We are thankful to the U.S. Supreme Court for sparing Leo's life,"
Sullivan said. "Naturally, Leo will probably spend the rest of his life in
prison.
"Finally on behalf of my firm and the Little family, our thoughts and
prayers go out to the (victim's) family."
A week before Little ended a carjacking and kidnapping by shooting Antonio
Christopher Chavez Jr. in the back of the head, Little abducted another
San Antonio resident.
Finding that the door to Malachi Wurpts' apartment had been accidentally
left open, Little entered and woke Wurpts at gunpoint.
Little forced Wurpts to drive to a couple of ATMs and withdraw a few
hundred dollars before stealing Wurpts' Mustang and leaving him stranded
on a rural road.
Wurpts said he had mixed emotions about the Supreme Court ruling that will
let his kidnapper live.
On one hand, he was glad that Little might have a chance to mature. On the
other hand, the chance of parole in about 34 years is a chance Little
probably didn't deserve.
"The reason I'm disappointed is really because the thought of him ever
getting out of prison really bothers me," Wurpts said. "What he did was
very bad, and I dont want to take anything away from that and I feel like
this decision does that."
(source: San Antonio Express-News)
************************
Views differ over ruling against juvenile death penalty
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it's unconstitutional to
execute juvenile killers.
The ruling, which impacts cases in 19 states including Texas, is said by
some to be a step forward for human rights, while others believe it's a
step backwards for victims.
When deputy constable Michael Eakin was shot and killed, a 17-year-old was
behind the gun. Eakin's parents can't imagine how that person, Michael
Lopez, will not have to pay the ultimate price for taking the life of
their son.
"When Michael Lopez gets an opportunity to see the sun up and sun go down
and every breath of fresh air that he draws, it's a breath of fresh air
that our son will not get to enjoy," Eakin's father Bill Green said.
The court's ruling said juveniles who commit a crime can no longer be
given the death sentence. In all, 29 sentences in Texas will be commuted.
That means 17-year-old Bruce Lee Williams gets a second chance. He
carjacked a young couple in Dallas and forced them to drive 19 miles as
they begged for their lives. Then, he raped the young wife in front of her
husband before shooting and killing her.
Williams has been on death row since December 1999. In an exclusive
interview with News 8, his family thanked the judges, saying they'd been
praying for this.
"I think every man needs another chance in life, you know," Williams'
uncle Roy Mack said. "I really do."
Napoleon Beazly was 17 at the time of his crime. His execution in May 2002
was the last time this issue boiled over in Texas. Days before he was
executed, he said age shouldn't spare his life.
Said Beazly, "To sit here and say, 'OK, you don't deserve to die because
you were 17' ... what does that tell our kids? 'Hey, it's cool to commit
murder if you're 17?'"
Eakin's parents say they will never get the justice they sought for their
son....while other's say there is justice in not killing those they say
are too young to know the difference.
(source: WFAA (Dallas) News)
**************************
Legislators applaud ruling that prohibits juvenile execution
The U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling prohibiting death sentences for
juveniles will have a "major impact" on the criminal justice system in
Texas, said Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston.
At a press conference today, Ellis and several other members of the State
Legislature lauded the Supreme Court ruling in Roper vs. Simmons that says
death sentences for juvenile offenders constitutes cruel and unusual
punishment.
Sen. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville, said the ruling "brings to light one of
the major defects" in the state's criminal justice system, the lack of a
jury's opportunity to hand down a sentence of life without parole.
He said that after the Supreme Court ruling, Texas juries will no longer
be able to ensure that juveniles who have committed heinous crimes will
not be back on the streets. Juveniles will now face the possibility of a
life sentence with the possibility of parole.
Lucio said the Legislature faces the task now of protecting the people of
the state from such offenders. His SB 60 adds life without parole as an
option for sentencing by Texas juries.
"Now is the time more than ever before to pass this piece of legislation,"
he said.
Lucio asked if the state is going to allow persons who Texas juries would
have given a death penalty to now to be eligible for parole.
Ellis said the Supreme Court ruling will take a little of the "wild, wild
West" out of the Texas criminal justice system. He said if young people
are not mature enough to vote, they should not be considered mature enough
to be put to death.
Texas is 1 of 3 states that allows execution of juvenile offenders, said
Ellis, and of the 22 juveniles executed since the death penalty was
reinstated in 1972, 13 of those juveniles were executed - nearly 60
percent - in Texas. "I am glad that this practice will no longer be
tolerated in Texas."
Ellis said there is now no room for argument on the issue.
The Supreme Court ruling now makes it "very clear" that a moratorium on
the death penalty in Texas is in order, said Rep. Garnet Coleman,
D-Houston. He noted that the Supreme Court has ruled 2 classes of
individuals should not be executed - juveniles and those with mental
retardation. That and other issues such as recent revelations of problems
in the Houston Crime Lab have necessitated review of some death row cases.
Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon, D-San Antonio, said she has carried legislation
to ban executions for several sessions. She said if the state is going to
have a death penalty, the appropriate cutoff age should be 18, because
someone under that age is not fully developed emotionally. She said she
applauds the Supreme Court decision.
The ruling was called a "great day for the juveniles in the state of
Texas" by Rep. Alma Allen, D-Houston. She said the state should "become
more humane as we deal with our youth offenders."
Steve Hall, director of Stand Down Texas, said the Supreme Court ruling
calls for an "examination of the criminal justice system with respect to
the death penalty."
Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, said Texans should ask themselves before
approving of the death penalty, "Do you want to be party to the execution
of an innocent Texan?" He said that is where the state stands regarding
death penalty reforms. "It's clear to me we have a system that's broken -
that needs repair."
(source: News 8 Austin)
*************************
Proving Innocence----Campus class formed for inmate project
8 undergraduates were hand-picked to investigate criminal cases for UTAs
first National Innocence Project conference course.
The project is designed to build a national movement to free prisoners who
feel they were wrongfully convicted. UT-Austin Law School and the
University of Houston Law School are the only other universities to offer
the course. Both offer the class at the graduate level.
John Stickels, criminology and criminal justice assistant professor,
brought the course to UTA after practicing law for 22 years.
This is Stickels second semester teaching here and his 1st semester
teaching this class.
Within those 2 decades, Stickels prosecuted 2 murder cases and defended 5.
Out of the 7 cases, none were sent to death row.
Stickels also was a district attorney in West Texas. He is board certified
in criminal law and a nationally recognized criminal trial law attorney.
Stickels chose eight students out of 50 to be in the class this semester
based on each students previous work in other classes.
In class, students are given 4 random cases and are required to read and
analyze each case to determine whether the criminal deserves another
trial.
The national project attorneys receive letters from convicts pleading
their innocence. The case is then brought to project participants,
including UTA. The students review the cases along with other related
documents.
Afterward, students write a memorandum and send it to the inmates
acknowledging the status of their cases and telling them whether the
project feels they merit further investigation.
History senior Oliver Smith said he enjoys the class and finds it
extremely beneficial.
"This class gives insight into the mindset of criminals," he said.
Criminal justice senior Amanda Horner agreed that the class offers
students hands-on experience.
"I've gotten a lot out of the class," she said.
The course is a mix between lecture and open discussion. Currently, the
class is reviewing a sexual assault case and a murder case - both occurred
in North Texas.
Right now, the course is a senior-level conference course. Stickels said
next semester it will be offered as a regular course, meaning the class
will meet more than once a week and be considered a core criminal justice
course. The students will still be hand-selected.
Stickels said he thinks the class prepares students for their chosen
careers.
"I am greatly thankful to the dean's office for all their help in letting
me do this," he said.
(source: The Shorthorn)
*******************************
Yogurt shop murderer on death row may receive life instead
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the death penalty unconstitutional for
crimes committed by juveniles.
The 5-4 decision will impact about 28 death row inmates in Texas and 70
inmates nationwide.
Locally, it may have an even wider impact, not just for the one inmate
that may be spared the death penalty, but for anyone connected to the 1991
infamous yogurt shop murders.
On Dec. 6, 1991, 4 teenage girls were murdered in a North Austin yogurt
shop. 10 years later, police find and prosecute several suspects. Only 2
are convicted and sentenced for direct participation in the murder of Amy
Ayers, Eliza Thomas, Jennifer Harbison, and her sister, Sarah Harbison.
One of those convicted was Robert Springsteen, who was 17 at the time and
is now on death row. Springsteen is appealing his 2001 conviction with the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Carlos Garcia is one of the defense attorneys on that case.
"It appears the courts are finally catching up with science. I mean
science has been telling us that people under the age of 21, they're
brains are not fully developed. I mean, they have poor impulse control,
for example," Garcia said.
Garcia's client, Michael Scott, managed to avoid the death penalty and is
serving life in prison.
Now Springsteen may be spared from death row as well. Travis County
District Attorney Ronnie Earle released a statement Tuesday saying it
appears Springsteen's sentence will be changed to life in prison.
Life without parole is not an option in Texas, so Springsteen would serve
the same sentence as Scott - life in prison with the possibility of parole
after 35 years.
Garcia said victims families shouldnt feel any sense of injustice.
"I don't know what to tell [the victims families]. You know life in prison
is not an easy punishment. It's not mercy to get life in prison. I mean,
the conditions in prison are not such that people want to get that,"
Garcia said.
Even less mercy, if 4 state bills that seek life without parole for
certain cases gain any momentum.
It remains to be seen if the more severe life sentence gains supporters
now that the death penalty is no longer an option for juvenile offenders.
(source: News 8 Austin)
*****************************
Dissecting gag order's dynamics----Judge's plan for unbiased jury in
trucker trial could backfire
While the judge in the death-penalty trial of Tyrone Williams may have
been trying to ensure an unbiased jury when she imposed a gag order, some
consultants and lawyers say the order probably increased the chance of
bias toward the prosecution.
Williams, 34, a Jamaican immigrant from Schenectady, N.Y., is accused of
causing the deaths of 19 illegal immigrants sealed in the back of his
tractor-trailer during a smuggling attempt in Texas in 2003.
On the 1st day of jury selection, which is continuing this week, several
people were disqualified because they said they believe Williams is
guilty.
Jury consultants attribute that prejudice to a gag order imposed by U.S.
District Judge Vanessa Gilmore, who used one of the few tools available to
a judge trying to ensure an untainted jury pool.
The media rely mainly on law enforcement for information in criminal
cases, which usually means the information potential jurors receive in the
media favors the prosecution, said Kathy Kellermann, a jury consultant in
the Los Angeles office of Trial Behavior Consulting.
The gag order ensures that the public will hear only the prosecution's
side, she said.
Austin jury consultant Douglas Keene said, "If all the public has heard is
the worst possible spin on the case, then those who have formed an opinion
can only have the worst opinion."
Compounding the problem is reporters' tendency to have closer relations
with law enforcement than with the defense, Kellermann said.
Because reporters primarily rely on law enforcement-generated information
from public records, media reports tend to use language that supports the
prosecution, she said.
Even the word "victim" can prejudice public opinion, Kellermann said.
"The word 'victim' prejudges," she said. "We already assume they've been
hurt. 'Accuser' is appropriate."
Charles Baird, a visiting professor at the South Texas College of Law and
a former Texas Court of Criminal Appeals judge, said law enforcement is
aware of its advantage and uses it.
One example, he said, is the "perp walk," in which a defendant in jail
garb and chains is led in front of the cameras.
"The truth is, it's choreographed," Baird said.
Even if the gag order prevents the defense and prosecution from discussing
the case publicly, it's nearly impossible to shield potential jurors from
media exposure, said Houston jury consultant Robert Gordon.
Media-savvy lawyers find ways to evade gag orders by enlisting surrogates
not covered by the orders, Kellermann said. Defense lawyers in the
Williams case have not used surrogates.
Yet, for all its flaws, a gag order can be effective, Baird said.
"I think it's the only tool the judge has," he said. "If there is not a
gag order, the judge cannot control the message and there is no telling
what the lawyers will say."
Keene said the best use of a gag order is "to keep it from becoming a
circus because the public jockeying is minimized."
He said that, although some prospective jurors may be biased toward the
prosecution because of the gag order, they are quickly weeded out through
questioning during jury selection in death-penalty cases.
"The people who glom on to those stories are probably bad for the defense,
anyway," he said.
Kellermann said gag orders are most effective if imposed immediately,
before a case has much media exposure. But normally, they come "when the
judge gets sufficiently angered by one or both sides and would really like
to get the trial under control again," she said.
Gilmore imposed her gag order on May 18, nearly a year after the arrests
of Williams and others indicted in the case.
David Graeven, jury consultant at the San Francisco office of Trial
Behavior Consulting, said gag orders in high-profile cases tend to
encourage a newly discovered phenomenon: the stealth juror.
Stealth jurors lie in an effort to get onto juries, either so they can
ensure conviction or because they oppose the death penalty, he said.
"I would be very concerned about it," Graeven said, noting that 2 such
people, bent on conviction, were discovered in the California trial of
Scott Peterson last year.
Peterson was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their
unborn son. He was sentenced to death.
The way to detect stealth jurors is to know their backgrounds and watch
for inconsistent statements, Graeven said.
"One juror in a criminal case can make all the difference in the world,"
he said. "They can hang a case."
(source: Houston Chronicle)
************************
Killer to be removed from death row after Supreme Court ban
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that it is unconstitutional to
sentence juvenile murderers to death, even if they've been certified to
stand trial as an adult. That means a Central Texas man who was sentenced
to die for killing a Temple woman will not face lethal injection.
Derrick Guillen, 24, was sentenced to die in 1999 when he was 17 years
old. In the summer of 1999, a Bell County jury found Guillen guilty of
capital murder and gave him the death penalty. Because of Tuesdays Supreme
Court ruling, that jury's decision is no longer legally binding and that
has some Bell County officials pretty upset.
NBC 6 News interviewed Derrick Guillen 2 years ago in Huntsville where he
is today on death row. On March 26, 1998, a 17-year-old Guillen raped and
killed Margaret Shores in her Temple home. He was to die by lethal
injection, but not anymore.
Bell County District Attorney Henry Garza prosecuted Guillen in 1999 and
says, "Families of murder victims were dealt a significant blow."
Garza says hes disheartened by the supreme courts decision and says
Guillen knew what he was doing, regardless of his age.
"Her throat had been slashed," Garza says. "There was evidence of rape.
There was evidence of a mutilated finger. There's no doubt in my mind that
the facts went to show and I think a jury so it the same way because they
convicted him, that this was a premeditated, laying in wait, jumping on
Margaret Shores when she entered."
We spoke to Guillen's attorney in Detroit, Michigan about the courts
decision who said Guillens mother was "ecstatically happy" about the
ruling.
"In a situation in which we as a society say if you're under 18 you can't
enter into contracts, you can't smoke, you can't vote, etc., then it
doesn't make a lot of sense to say, but you can be executed," he says.
Garza says it's true teenagers do not enjoy all rights, but, "Not every
17-year-old is committing capital murder."
And for the teenager who was convicted of rape and murder, two years ago
he told us he'd changed.
"I regret a lot of things I've done because I've grown up since I've been
here," hed said.
Changed or not, one thing is for sure, Guillen will be taken off death
row.
Garza also says the Supreme Court's decision is not only a significant
blow to Margaret Shores family, but to anyone whos ever suffered from such
a horrendous crime.
What happens next to Derrick Guillen isn't exactly known. He will most
likely go before an appeals court where he will be sentenced to life in
prison. The District Attorney says there's also the possibility Guillen
could get 40 years with a chance of parole. But one thing is for sure:
Guillen will be taken off death row.
The State of Texas has the highest number of death row inmates who were
juveniles when they committed their crime with 29. Tuesday in Austin,
Governor Rick Perry talked about the high court's decision.
"This is a very bright line that the Supreme Court has drawn. It is clear
what they said, if you are 18 and above you will be treated as eligible
for the death penalty. If you are 17 years and 364 days you are not."
Governor Rick Perry says he's asked the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
to review the state's cases affected by the Supreme Court ruling. Perry
says he would consider signing legislation to allow sentences of life
without parole for juveniles, something that's currently not an option for
Texas juries.
The execution of criminals any younger than 16 were already unlawful. The
Supreme Court ruling will impact a total of 72 people who were juveniles
when they were convicted and sentenced to death.
(source: KCEN TV News)
****************************
Death penalty ruling to have profound effect in Texas
Among the Texas killers affected by the Supreme Court ruling were:
-Efrain Perez and Raul Villarreal of Harris County (Houston), convicted
with 3 others of the gang-rape and beating deaths of Jennifer Ertman, 14
and Elizabeth Pena, 16. Perez and Villarreal were 17 at the time.
-Robert Springsteen of Travis County (Austin), convicted at 17 in 2001 of
the infamous "Yogurt Shop" slayings in which 4 teenage girls were bound,
gagged and fatally shot in the head at a yogurt shop a decade earlier.
-Jorge Alfredo Salinas, who at 17 carjacked a man in Hidalgo County
(McAllen) in July 2001, fatally shot him in the head, and left the man's
21-month-old daughter to die of dehydration and exposure strapped in her
car seat in a brush area near the Rio Grande.
-Johnnie Bernal was one day shy of his 18th birthday when he shot and
killed Lee Dilley as he stood outside a Houston drive-in with his high
school prom date.
-11 of the juvenile murderers on Texas' death row were convicted in Harris
County.
(source: KLTV News)
*******************************
juvenile offenders to be spared in the wake of the Roper v Simmons US
Supreme Court decision:
996 Barraza Mauro
999081 Alvarado Steven
999096 Soriano Oswaldo
999125 Villarreal Raul
999128 Monterrubio Jose
999132 Perez Efrain
999138 Dixon Tony
999146 Dickens Justin
999155 Bernal Johnnie
999163 Williams Nanon
999185 Capetillo Edward
999193 Jones Anzel
999211 Dewberry John
999221 Cobb Raymond
999236 Johnson Eddie
999254 Arthur Mark
999261 Arroyo Randy
999302 Little Leo
999310 Guillen Derek
999311 Solomon Christopher
999318 Lopez Michael
999338 Williams Bruce
999340 Wilson Geno
999363 Reeves Whitney
999372 Tran Son
999389 Springsteen, IV Robert
999428 Salinas Jorge
999485 Acuna Robert
