March 27
FLORIDA:
Tampa Bay's state attorneys say 17 local death row inmates could be eligible
for resentencing
One man raped a woman, slit her throat, then tried to wash his DNA off her body
with cleaning chemicals and lighter fluid.
Another raped and mutilated a 94-year-old woman in her home, then set her body
on fire.
A 3rd stabbed his wife and stepdaughter to death, donning a painter's suit to
dispose of their remains.
All were sentenced to death, but not by unanimous juries.
More than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court declared Florida's death penalty
law unconstitutional, the men are among at least 17 death row inmates from the
Tampa Bay area whom local state attorneys have identified as likely to be
resentenced.
Within the next year, they could be reappearing in local courtrooms, arguing
that they were condemned to death under an illegal sentencing procedure. At the
heart of each case are juries whose recommendations for death were not always
unanimous, as is now required.
"We have to thoroughly evaluate each case on a case-by-case basis," said
Hillsborough State Attorney Andrew Warren. "The death penalty is a critical
part of our criminal justice system. The most important thing to me is that we
get it right."
Warren's office has assembled a list of 7 death row defendants whose cases
included juries that were not unanimous. In Pinellas County, State Attorney
Bernie McCabe's office anticipates requests for new sentences from 8 men, plus
2 more in Pasco County.
Some are notorious.
A jury was unanimous in recommending the death penalty for Dontae Morris for
the killings of 2 Tampa police officers. But a 2nd jury voted 10-2 to give him
death for the murder of Derek Anderson.
Some may be mentally ill.
Pedro Hernandez-Alberto, who shot his 2 stepdaughters to death in Apollo Beach
in 1999, had a jury vote 10-2 in favor of death. Before trial and throughout
his appeals, attorneys have questioned his mental competency.
Some have been condemned repeatedly.
Troy Merck has been sentenced to death 3 times over the years for a 1991
stabbing outside a St. Petersburg nightclub. His most recent death sentence, in
2004, came after a jury vote of 9-3.
Before the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case of Hurst vs. Florida,
which invalidated the state's death penalty law, Florida judges imposed death
sentences after recommendations from juries, which could be made by a bare
majority of 7-5.
The Hurst case applied a 2002 Supreme Court decision, Ring vs. Arizona, which
held it unconstitutional for a judge instead of a jury to find the facts
necessary to impose the death penalty.
This month, Gov. Rick Scott signed a new law, requiring a jury to make
unanimous findings about aggravating and mitigating circumstances before
unanimously agreeing to a death sentence.
Since the Hurst decision, the Florida Supreme Court has decided that some of
the state's 381 death row inmates - those who hadn't completed a direct appeal
or whose sentences came after Ring - may have unconstitutional sentences.
On Thursday, the state Supreme Court overturned the death sentence of Kenneth
Jackson, who murdered a Seffner mother in 2007.
The other local cases likely to undergo resentencing are those who were sent to
death row with nonunanimous jury recommendations, Warren said.
But even some cases with unanimous juries could see arguments for new
sentences, according to Warren. That would add four more defendants in
Hillsborough, including Willie Crain, who was condemned for the 1998 abduction
and murder of 7-year-old Amanda Brown,
Prospects for avoiding death sentences are even less clear.
"It's not like any of them are going to walk out the door," said Bruce
Bartlett, the chief assistant state attorney for Pinellas and Pasco counties.
"The very best, most optimistic outcome is they get life sentences."
----
Here are the local death row cases that state attorneys expect could be
eligible for new sentences, along with the votes by juries that recommended
death.
Hillsborough County
Ray Johnston strangled 2 women in 1997 in Tampa. Jury vote: 12-0 in one case;
11-1 in the other.
Adam Davis stabbed his girlfriend's mother to death in 1998 in Carrollwood
after injecting her with bleach. Jury vote: 7-5.
Pedro Hernandez-Alberto shot his 2 step-daughters to death in Apollo Beach in
1999. Jury vote: 10-2.
Khalid Pasha stabbed his wife and stepdaughter to death in 2002 at an office
park near Town 'N Country. Convicted and sentenced to death twice. Jury vote:
11-1.
William Deparvine shot a man and a woman in 2003 after he met them to ask about
buying a vintage pickup truck. Jury vote: 8-4.
Kenneth Jackson abducted a Seffner mother of 3 in 2007, then stabbed her to
death. Jury vote: 11-1. Late this week, the state supreme court overturned his
sentence.
Dontae Morris killed 2 Tampa police officers, after killing another man weeks
earlier. Jury vote: 12-0 for the officers; 10-2 for the civilian.
Pinellas County
Jeffrey Muehleman beat and asphyxiated a 97-year-old man in 1983. Sentenced to
death a 2nd time in 2003. Jury vote: 10-2.
Troy Merck stabbed a man repeatedly in 1991 outside a St. Petersburg bar after
he was asked not to lean on a car. Jury vote: 9-3.
Harry Butler stabbed and strangled his former girlfriend in 1997 in Clearwater.
Jury vote: 11-1.
Charles Peterson shot and killed a man during a robbery at a Big Lots store in
St. Petersburg on Christmas Eve 1997. Jury vote: 8-4.
Genghis Kocaker stabbed a cab driver, bound him, then set fire to his car in
Clearwater in 2004. Jury vote: 11-1.
Richard Robards stabbed a Clearwater couple before attempting to steal their
safe. Jury vote: 7-5.
John Hampton raped a woman in 2007 in Clearwater, slit her throat, then tried
to destroy DNA evidence. Jury vote: 9-3.
Ralph Wright strangled his former lover and smothered her 15-month-old son in
2007 in St. Petersburg. Jury vote: 7-5.
Pasco County
Phillup Partin stabbed, beat and strangled a 16-year-old girl in 2002 in Port
Richey. Jury vote: 9-3.
John Sexton raped and murdered Ann Parlato, 94, in her New Port Richey home in
2010 before lighting her body on fire. Jury vote: 10-2.
(source: tampabay.com)
ARKANSAS:
American state asks for people to come forward and WATCH death row prisoners
get executed----Arkansas state law says at least 6 'respectable citizens' must
watch every execution to make sure protocol is followed
Government officials in Arkansas have issued a plea for volunteers to come
forward and watch criminals get executed - so they can continue sentencing lags
to the death penalty.
State law says that 6 to 12 people aged at least 21 must witness every
execution, to make sure protocol is followed.
The volunteers must be "respectable citizens", meaning they cannot have any
prior convictions.
The state is struggling to find enough people to witness 8 planned executions
over the course of 10 days - an unusually high number.
No other American state has carried out so many in such a short time since
1977.
The rush to carry out the executions is because the drug used for lethal
injections in Arkansas is about to reach its expiration date.
The 8 men set for execution were all convicted of murder between 1989 and 1999,
and have been on death row since.
Arkansas has not executed any prisoners since 2005 because of legal
complications and difficulty procuring the drug needed for the lethal
injection.
And now, in a bid to carry on with the planned executions of eight prisoners,
Wendy Kelley, Director of the Department of Correction, has reportedly
approached people to ask volunteers to come forward.
According to Arkansas Online, Kelley contacted a Rotary Club in Little Rock,
saying: "You seem to be a group that does not have felony backgrounds and are
over 21.
"So if you're interested in serving in that area, in this serious role, just
call my office."
However, Kelley couldn't find anyone to take up her offer at the club.
Speaking on behalf of the club, acting president Bill Booker said: "What I
suspect is that some people might support the death penalty, but when it comes
to witnessing something like that, it's a different story.
"It may cause emotional trauma for quite a while. It would be one of the most
significant things you'll ever see in your life."
(source: thesun.co.uk)
***********************
An Arkansas Inmate Is Set to Be Executed Due to a Legal Technicality----Marcel
Williams has spent the last 2 decades on death row, and his execution is set to
take place next month. But his lawyers argue he never received a fair trial in
the first place.
Marcel Williams is scheduled to die on April 24th, 2017. Williams was convicted
in 1997 for the rape and murder of Stacy Errickson, a 22-year-old woman who was
found in a shallow grave near Little Rock 3 years earlier. The jury deliberated
Williams' sentence for just 30 minutes.
Williams is 1 of 8 men to be executed through lethal injection in Arkansas over
just 4 days in April as part of the state's effort to use up its supply of
midazolam before the drug expires.
But Williams' attorneys say his initial trial lawyers failed to present
mitigating evidence about his traumatic upbringing to the jury in 1997. That
evidence, they argue, would likely have resulted in a life sentence for
Williams. Since that initial trial, a procedural technicality has prevented the
legal system from righting this wrong. Now, Williams is asking the Arkansas
Parole Board for clemency.
The United States Supreme Court has long recognized that the circumstances of
an individual's life can influence culpability and thus sentencing. For this
very reason, the Court struck down North Carolina's mandatory death sentences
for 1st-degree murders in the 1976 case Woodson v. North Carolina.
"A process that accords no significance to relevant facets of the character and
record of the individual offender or the circumstances of the particular
offense excludes from consideration in fixing the ultimate punishment of death
the possibility of compassionate or mitigating factors stemming from the
diverse frailties of humankind," the Court ruled in Woodson v. North Carolina.
In Williams' case, that mitigating evidence was his violent and turbulent
childhood. In written testimony to the parole board, David Lisak, a professor
of psychology at the University of Massachusetts, wrote that Williams, who
suffered a childhood marked by neglect, violent beatings, and sexual abuse, was
"exposed to pretty much every category of traumatic experience that is
generally used to describe childhood trauma." While a child, Williams' mother
prostituted him out to older women in exchange for food stamps or money for
bills. Lisak characterized the violence Williams endured as "unrelenting" and
"savage."
Williams' trial attorneys now claim, according to Williams' petition to the
clemency board, that, at that time, Williams' defense team "didn't really
understand what the true meaning of what mitigation was," which runs counter to
the standards for capital defense attorneys that were already standard practice
in the 1990s.
"Certainly by the mid-'80s it was understood that childhood trauma, abuse,
parental neglect, extreme physical abuse would be powerful evidence for a
jury," says Cassandra Stubbs, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's
Capital Punishment Project. "That was some of the heart of the evidence that
capital defense lawyers should be looking for and investigating in their
cases."
The lawyer responsible for Williams' appeal also failed to present this
evidence at the proceedings requesting a new trial in 2000 - despite the fact
that the request was based on the argument that his trial attorneys did not
provide adequate counsel when they failed to present mitigating evidence to the
jury.
A new crop of attorneys took over Williams' case in 2006 and filed a petition
in a federal district court to present evidence about Williams' troubled
childhood. And they succeeded in overturning Williams' death sentence, at least
temporarily. "[I]t is reasonably probable that but for the errors and omissions
of his lawyers the jury would have returned a verdict to impose a sentence of
life imprisonment without parole rather than a sentence of death," Chief
Justice Leon Holmes found in 2007. Judge Holmes ordered the state to grant
Williams a new sentencing hearing or change his sentence from death to life
without parole. But the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned his decision
on the grounds that the federal court could not consider evidence that was
never presented in state courts. In other words, despite the validity of the
evidence, Williams no longer had the right to present it, due to his lawyers'
errors.
"It's kind of astonishing to me that the court is basically saying, 'there's
evidence out there, we know its out there, there's no problems with it, except
a procedural problem, but let's go ahead and approve the death sentence,'"
Stubbs says.
"A lot of times what the courts will say is they are protecting the law, and
they have to follow the rule of the law or its not any good, and to a degree
that???s true," says Jason Kearney, one of the attorneys who took up Williams'
case in 2006. "But ... when someone's life is on the line I think there's an
exception to any rule that ought to come into play."
The Williams' parole board hearing on Monday will be the last chance for this
evidence to make a difference in his sentence, but the board rarely grants
clemency in capital cases, Kearney says. A negative outcome for Williams would
also set a troubling precedent for anyone else who has a similar path to
clemency.
"For all of this compelling mitigation information to just go unconsidered and
to have never been put in front of a jury, the legal system really fails when
this happens," Kearney says. "If the clemency board doesn't recognize that,
then they're really not serving their purpose."
(source: Pacific Standard Magazine)
OKLAHOMA:
Man sentenced to death penalty for 1999 slaying of Oklahoma trooper due for
federal hearing----Vian man found guilty of killing OHP trooper in 1999 seeks
resentencing
A Vian man found guilty in federal court of killing an Oklahoma Highway Patrol
trooper in the midst of a drug raid in 1999 is set to appear in court Monday
for an evidentiary hearing for his quest to have his death sentence overturned.
Kenneth Eugene Barrett, 55, will present his case at the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Oklahoma in support of his belief his counsel was
ineffective during the penalty phase of his 2005 trial because his lawyers did
not provide mitigating evidence to the jury about his mental health status.
The district court will determine whether Barrett's trial counsel was
inadequate and if so, whether that resulted in prejudice during the penalty
phase of his trial and therefore merits a re-sentencing proceeding.
The U.S. Attorney's Office in Muskogee declined to comment on Barrett's case,
citing pending litigation. Phone calls to 2 of Barrett's attorneys were not
returned as of Friday evening.
Barrett was convicted in 2005 of fatally shooting Trooper David "Rocky" Eales
with an AR-15 rifle on Sept. 24, 1999, while Eales and other troopers,
including John "Buddy" Hamilton, executed a drug-related search warrant
overnight at Barrett's residence in search of methamphetamine. Barrett
additionally received 2 consecutive life sentences without parole in federal
court for related weapons convictions.
Hamilton was seriously injured in the incident but survived. Another trooper
shot Barrett in the leg during the melee, according to court records.
The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in 2015 that said
Barrett's trial attorneys "apparently did little to investigate his background
or mental health through his family," citing testimony from family members that
indicated attorneys never asked them in-depth questions about either. The
opinion goes on to state that case records suggest Barrett's federal attorneys
were aware through state counsel that his mental health status merited further
investigation.
A series of doctors, according to the document, have diagnosed Barrett over a
nearly 20-year period with mixed personality disorder, organic affective
disorder, bipolar disorder, avoidant personality disorder and post-traumatic
stress disorder.
1 of his state attorneys provided records to his federal counsel that revealed
Barrett had developmental delays as a child and was subject to hospitalization
more than once for mental health-related reasons, according to the opinion.
However, the attorneys who prosecuted Barrett said the defense reported Barrett
himself limited his team's ability to present mitigation evidence because he
did not want the outcome of his case to "hinge on personal sympathy for him."
But in deciding to send the case back to Muskogee for an evidentiary hearing,
the 10th Circuit noted that one defense attorney said Barrett was "among the
most cooperative criminal defense clients" he has represented.
Despite the 10th Circuit's finding, government attorneys wrote in a February
brief that a psychiatrist retained for the hearing will testify that an
evaluation of Barrett in January did not result in any mental health diagnoses.
Another doctor, according to that brief, is set to testify for the U.S. that he
diagnosed Barrett as a psychopath.
The 10th Circuit's 2015 decision overturned a 2012 ruling from U.S. District
Judge James Payne that denied Barrett's claim his sentence was unconstitutional
due to ineffective assistance of counsel.
However, an order from the 10th Circuit in November denied Barrett
authorization to file another related challenge to his conviction due to
alleged prosecutorial and police misconduct because "there is too much evidence
that a jury could credit concerning both the shooting and (Barrett's)
manufacture and distribution of methamphetamine."
"His conviction is still well supported by eyewitness accounts of law
enforcement officers, the testimony of multiple acquaintances ... and physical
evidence at the scene of the crime," the order states.
Last May, Barrett's attorneys filed a renewed motion to vacate his conviction
and sentence based on recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions related to
prosecution of illegal firearms cases and the application of the death penalty.
The Supreme Court in October again declined to review Barrett's case.
Barrett also faced murder and 3 shooting with intent to kill charges in
Sequoyah County District Court related to the same incident and was tried twice
after his 1st trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury.
A Sequoyah County jury in February 2004 found Barrett guilty of lesser-included
charges of 1st-degree manslaughter and a single count of assault and battery
with a dangerous weapon, and recommended a total of 30 years in prison.
Oklahoma Department of Corrections records show Barrett discharged his
manslaughter sentence in April 2013, but that his 10-year assault sentence -
which was consecutive - remains active. The state's 85 % law, which includes
both offenses, didn't take effect until roughly a year after Barrett was
charged.
The U.S. Attorney's Office in Muskogee filed federal charges in the matter in
September 2004 after the resolution of the state case.
(source: Tulsa World)
_______________________________________________
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
