June 2



SOUTH CAROLINA:

Prosecutor says state needs execution drugs


A South Carolina prosecutor says he didn't seek the death penalty against a man who admitted killing 7 people because he couldn't guarantee to the relatives of the victims that the killer would be executed.

Solicitor Barry Barnette said May 26 that lawmakers need to figure out a way to restart the death penalty. South Carolina ran out of execution drugs and hasn't been able to obtain any more. The last execution in the state happened in 2011.

Todd Kohlhepp pleaded guilty to 7 counts of murder and other charges.

Kohlhepp, 44, admitted killing 4 people at a motorcycle shop in 2003 after becoming enraged by something the shop owner said. He also killed a husband and wife doing work on his Spartanburg County property in 2015 and the boyfriend of the woman found chained in a shipping container on Kohlhepp's property.

He was sentenced to life in prison without parole as part of a plea deal. Under the plea, he agreed to never appeal the sentence.

(source: sclawyersweekly.com)

******************

SC Supreme Court affirms death sentence for Ricky Lee Blackwell


The South Carolina Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court's decision to sentence Ricky Lee Blackwell to death.

Blackwell, 58, of Spartanburg was convicted in 2014 and sentenced to death for killing 8-year-old Brooke Center. Blackwell held Brooke in a chokehold and shot her 4 times as his ex-wife, who was dating Brooke's father, watched.

Affirmation of the sentence is just 1 step in the death penalty process, said Murray Glenn, spokesman for the 7th Circuit Solicitor's Office.

There is no guideline in terms of how long the appeal process takes, but this moves Blackwell 1 step closer to execution, Glenn said.

(source: goupstate.com)






FLORIDA:

Jury to decide if Christian Theodore will face death penalty for 2014 slaying


Prosecutors told a jury Thursday why 23-year-old Christian Theodore should face the death penalty for the 2014 slaying of Jonathan "J.J." Jeffery.

Theodore was convicted of 1st-degree murder and armed home-invasion robbery during a week-long trial in December.

Thursday's court hearing was the penalty phase of the case, which was presented to a new jury.

Assistant State Attorney Karen Fraivillig, the lead prosecutor, said Theodore was "the shot caller, the 2-star general" and "the only one in the group that knew the address."

"His executive functioning was not impaired," she said.

Fraivillig referred to a stack of medical records from Theodore's schools and medical reports. She suggested that his mother, who was at the hearing, did everything she could, and Theodore "chose this life."

Fraivillig concluded her argument by saying, "aggravators outweighed mitigators, and the state is pursuing death."

Assistant Public Defender Jerry Meisner addressed Fravillig's stack of records, saying that a man's life is "more than just a series of documents."

He showed jurors mental trauma reports and called it a "picture of misfortune." Meisner also said Theodore is bipolar and has other mental disorders.

Meisner told jurors Theodore suffered a "lifetime of abuse" and that he had a life-long history of psychotropic prescriptions.

He also attacked prosecutors' claim that the murder was premeditated, saying that the "plan was never to kill anyone."

Meisner concluded his arguments by reminding the jury to not judge out of anger: "An eye for an eye is a decision out of anger. Revenge is a decision of anger."

Jurors will return at 8:30 a.m. today to begin their deliberation.

'Commando style'

During his trial, prosecutors said Theodore shot Jeffery, 25, who was asleep with his wife, after Theodore and others burst "commando style" into Jeffery's home in the Summerside condominium complex.

2 of Theodore's co-defendants - Azalea Mendoza, 21, and Vincent Gonzalez, 27 - accepted plea deals in exchange for their testimony against Theodore.

3 other defendants involved in the murder - Shakoy Gale, 23, Aenri Ellis, 29, and Byron Jones, 27 - were each previously found guilty of murder and related charges and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Court documents and testimony showed that Mendoza had driven the men to and from St. Petersburg, trips captured on several security cameras near Jeffery's house, at a Walmart and a tollbooth.

Security video showed 3 of the men buying gloves and zip ties at Walmart on Cattlemen Road approximately 2 1/2 hours before the slaying.

The state said while the home was being ransacked, Theodore overheard Jonathan Jeffery speaking to his wife, and thought he had recognized him.

Theodore looked at one of the other intruders nearby, who nodded, and fired a single 9mm round into Jonathan Jeffery's head.

The couple's daughter was sleeping in another room, and their niece and nephew - 12-year-old twins - were sleeping on a living room couch.

The home invaders left the apartment with a backpack, an Xbox and 3 cellphones, according to Brandi Jeffery, the victim's wife.

Theodore chose not to testify in his own defense during the trial.

During his trial, prosecutors described for the jury how the assailants burst into the Jeffery home dressed in black and wearing masks and gloves, shouting that they were police to gain the couple's immediate compliance.

They also told jurors Theodore was a "2-star general in the Bloods," a notorious criminal street gang.

(source: Sarasota Herald Tribune)

*******************

Trials delayed for 2 men charged in double murder of Bradenton couple


The trials of the 2 men charged with in the slayings of a Bradenton couple during a drug-related armed home invasion in 2015 have been delayed until September and October.

Jimmie McNear, 20, and Trey Nonnombre, 21, were each indicted on 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and armed home invasion in the July 9, 2015, fatal shootings of Esther Deneus and her boyfriend, Kantral Markeith Brooks, both 29.

Just before 4 a.m. on July 9, 2015, Bradenton police officers were called to the 3900 block of Southern Parkway after a security alarm was triggered by the break-in at the home Deneus and Brooks shared. When officers arrived, they found the couple shot dead in the home. Their 5 children, between the ages of 1 and 11 at the time.

A 3rd defendant, Terez Jones, 34, who was facing identical charges and the death penalty as well, took a plea deal last month and was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Jones will have to testify truthfully against McNear and Nonnombre as part of the plea deal.

During a hearing in both cases on Tuesday afternoon, defense attorneys for McNear and Nonnombre argued for a continuance, citing Jones' taking a deal and becoming a witness against their clients as reasons they need more time to prepare.

On Thursday morning, Circuit Judge Diana Moreland granted a delay in the cases against both men. One of the cases was scheduled to be tried beginning June 12, but defense attorneys for McNear and Nonnombre argued that neither would be ready by then.

Nonnombre will now stand trial beginning Sept. 11. McNear will stand trial during a 5-week trial period that begins Oct. 16 after the conclusion of another death-penalty case in Sarasota that Moreland is presiding over.

Moreland also approved the removal Charles Lykes as the lead appointed attorney for McNear's defense. William Bennett, the counsel appointed to the case earlier this year, will now take the lead and a 2nd attorney will be appointed as his co-counsel.

Bennett, along with Bjorn Brunvand, defense attorney for Nonnombre, renewed previous arguments made in both cases in efforts to stop the state from seeking the death penalty should McNear or Nonnombre be convicted of 1st-degree murder.

Daniel Hernandez, lead defense attorney for Nonnombre, also argued Thursday morning to suppress the photo identification of Nonnombre by a witness in the case, saying that he was shown single photos of the suspects instead of a photo array.

Homicide detective Jeffrey Bliss testified that he showed the witness a photo of each of the 3 suspects after that witness had already identified McNear, Nonnombre and Jones. The witness also took the stand saying that he had known Nonnombre for at least a month before the murders, had spend several hours with him on several occasions, including the night before the murders, and saw McNear, Nonnombre and Jones leaving when they were going to committed the burglary.

"There was no reason why a photo pack couldn't be shown," Hernandez said.

Assistant State Attorney Art Brown argued that case law supports showing a witness individual photos because he was already familiar with them.

(source: bradenton.com)

**********************

Death penalty for Gonzalez


Isn't it interesting, the convicted killer of Byrd and Melanie Billings, Leonard P. Gonzalez Jr., gets a new hearing because only 10 jurors voted in favor of death. There was irrefutable evidence against him, and he still got a trial and an appeal.

Doesn't anyone question why Byrd and Melanie were not offered a trial before their death sentence was carried out? Not only did they not get a trial, they were not afforded an appeal before they were put to death. How obnoxious is that?

The standard for a conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt, but I would like to go one step further. If there is irrefutable evidence, beyond any shadow of a doubt in a capital crime where the victim(s) never were afforded a trial, let alone an appeal, the killer/killers should be removed from the courtroom, given 24 hours to make peace with their maker and loved ones, and then put to death at the end of the 24 hour time period. No appeals for errors by the prosecutors or defense attorneys. A new standard for the immediate imposition of the death penalty for those committing capital crimes.

After all, Byrd and Melanie Billings didn't have a choice on how they were to die, let alone be afforded a trial before their peers. Gonzalez needs to be put to death for his assumption of duties as judge, jury and executioner.

Richard Mullen, Pensacola

(source: Letter to the Editor, Pensacola News Journal)






ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama Attorney General responds to death row inmate's request for stay of execution


The Alabama Attorney General's Office filed a response yesterday to a death row inmate's request for a stay from execution.

The AG's Office filed their response Wednesday with the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, days after Robert Melson's attorneys asked that same court to stay Melson's execution until an appeal can be heard.

"Melson's motion for a stay of execution pending his appeal is due to be denied. ... The claims that give rise to his appeal are virtually identical to the claims raised by co-plaintiffs Ronald Bert Smith and Christopher Eugene Brooks and rejected by this Court. Melson's claims do not lead this Court to a different result. As such, he cannot satisfy his burden of demonstrating that he has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his claims," the AG's filing states, referring to two other death row inmates who were executed.

The document was filed by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and Alabama Solicitor General Andrew Brasher.

The document states Melson's claims are meritless and says he does not have a likelihood of success upon appeal. Therefore, the AG's Office is asking the appellate court to deny Melson's stay.

Melson's attorney, John Palombi with the Federal Defenders for the Middle District of Alabama filed a motion last week in the 11th District Court of Appeals asking for the execution to be stayed until a judge can review and rule on Melson's appeal regarding his challenge to Alabama's 3-drug lethal injection method of execution. A lower court denied Melson's motion because it was filed past the deadline, records show.

The AG's response filed Wednesday states Melson cannot establish any alternative to the state's three-injection execution method. It stated, "Finally, Melson cannot establish any of the other requirements for a stay of execution because he unreasonably delayed in seeking a stay and because the State and the victims in this case have a strong interest in carrying out Melson's sentence."

Melson was convicted in Etowah County for fatally shooting three people, and injuring another, at a Gadsden restaurant in April 1994. Employees Tamika Collins, 18, Nathaniel Baker, 17, and Darrell Collier, 23, were killed in the shooting. Bryant Archer was the only survivor and identified Melson as the shooter, while prosecutors said another man planned the crime.

Attorneys for Robert Melson filed the appeal to a lower courts ruling in the 11th District Court of Appeals last week. They are asking for a stay pending the outcome of Melson's appeal.

The filing from Palombi seeking a halt to the execution stated a list of reasons why the stay should be granted, claiming Melson meets the standard for being granted a stay, would likely be successful on appeal, and that he is not required to suggest a three-drug alternative method of execution.

The response filed by the AG stated, "Melson has been on death row for over 21 years for a crime he committed in 1994. His crime was particularly heinous, his conviction is valid, and a competent state court with jurisdiction over his case properly set his execution date according to Alabama law. At a minimum, this Court should strongly consider Alabama's interest in enforcing its criminal judgment in weighing the equities against the grant of a stay."

(source: al.com)

***********************

Urgent Action


EXECUTION SET IN CIRCUMSTANTIAL ALABAMA CASE

Robert Melson is scheduled to be executed in Alabama on 8 June. He was convicted on circumstantial evidence and sentenced to death in May 1996 for 3 murders during a robbery in 1994. He has consistently maintained that he was not involved in the crime.

Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:

* Calling on the governor to stop the execution of Robert Melson and to commute his death sentence;

* Noting the circumstantial nature of the case, and that no appeal court has considered the merits of his post-conviction appeals as a result of missed filing deadlines (noting what the governor said in the Arthur case).

Friendly reminder: If you send an email, please create your own instead of forwarding this one!

Contact below official by 8 June, 2017:

(source: Amnesty International)

Governor Kay Ivey

Alabama State Capitol, 600 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36130, USA

Phone: (334) 242-7100
Fax: +1 334 353 0004
Contact Form: http://governor.alabama.gov/contact (use US detail)

Salutation: Dear Governor

**********************

Colbert DA to seek death penalty in 2016 shooting case


The Colbert County District Attorney will seek the death penalty for Peter Capote if he is found guilty of capital murder in the shooting death of Ki-Jana Freeman.

Assistant Colbert County District Attorney Angela Hulsey recently filed the motion with Circuit Judge Hal Hughston Jr.'s office.

"We've been preparing like they would seek the death penalty," said Bill Marthaler, who along with Robert Graham is representing Capote.

Capote, 23, 1100 Midland Ave., Muscle Shoals, is charged with capital murder, 1st-degree assault, and discharging a gun into an occupied vehicle.

Police said Capote, Thomas Hubbad, 32, same address, Benjamin Owen Young, 29, 502 Staunton Ave., Florence, and De'Vontae Bernard Bates, 21, 106 Markate Ave., Muscle Shoals, are all charged in connection with the shooting death of Freeman, 19, of Tuscumbia.

The shooting took place March 1 outside Spring Creek Apartments on Avenue A in Tuscumbia. Freeman died at Helen Keller Hospital in Sheffield.

Tyler Blythe, 17, of Tuscumbia, was was flown to Huntsville Hospital, where he was treated for numerous gunshot wounds. He has been released and still is recovering from his injuries, police said.

Capote, Hubbard and Young have all been indicted for capital murder, 1st-degree assault, and shooting into an occupied vehicle. Bates was indicted for criminal conspiracy.

All 4 pleaded not guilty during preliminary hearings.

The case against Capote has been placed on the Aug. 21 circuit court criminal docket.

Chief Assistant Colbert County District Attorney Kyle Brown said prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against Capote because shooting into an occupied vehicle is a capital offense.

During testimony at a preliminary hearing, police said more than a dozen 7.62-caliber shell casings were found at the scene of the shooting. Tuscumbia police investigator Wes Holland said the car Freeman and Blythe were in had "12 bullet holes, all in the driver's side."

Capote, Hubbard and Young are being held without bail in the Colbert County Jail, while Bates is in jail on $500,000 bond.

(source: timesdaily.com)






OHIO:

Community activists say Dayton mom accused of killing kids shouldn't face death penalty


Community activist say a Dayton mom accused of fatally shooting 2 of her children in the head should not be eligible for the death penalty.

Bishop Richard Cox with Justice for Racial Equality and Brotherhood says he believes Claudena Helton is mentally ill. While Cox said he agrees that what Helton is accused of doing is wrong, she should have a mental evaluation, "the jumped the gun," Cox said of the Montgomery County Prosecutor Mat Heck. Cox believes Helton should not be charged with murder and that her case should be looked at again after a mental health evaluation is completed, "they need to give her some help," he said.

According to an affidavit, Helton admitted to Dayton Police that she shot her 6-year-old son Kaiden and her 8-year-old daughter Khmorra in the head. Police say Helton told officers she did it to save them from the "evils of the world." People walking by Helton's home on Lori Sue Avenue called 911 after seeing the children being dragged out from the home. On Tuesday, May 30, Heck called a news conference, and announced that Helton had been indicted on charges of aggravated murder and that she was eligible for the death penalty, "We reserve it for the most horrific, and shocking crimes, gut-wrenching crimes, this case meets those specifications," said Heck. When asked about Helton's mental state, Heck said she is presumed to be sane and fit to stand trial until it's proven otherwise.

Cox stood along with Donald Dominic of Dayton's New Black Panther Party this morning, June 1, and said they believe Helton suffers from mental health issues. "They're trying her in the court of public opinion," Dominic said, "they're trying to get the public on their side to support them taking the woman's life." Cox said today he believes the system, particularly Children Services, failed Helton and her family. Police records show in 2014, Children Services was called after a teacher noticed bruises on Khmorra's arm and chest, marks on her cheek and cut on her lip. The child said her mom hit her with a belt buckle. Helton appeared in court this morning to be arraigned, and stood mute. A judge entered a 'not guilty' plea on her behalf and set her bond at $1,000,000. Helton's next court date, according to court records, is June 15.

(source: WKEF news)



INDIANA:

COA: Indiana death penalty protocol 'void'


Indiana's means of carrying out the death penalty through lethal injection "is void and without effect," the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Thursday, reversing a death row inmate???s challenge to the Indiana Department of Correction's execution protocol.

Judge John Baker wrote for the court the Department of Correction was bound to enact new lethal-injection protocols under the state's Administrative Rules and Procedure Act (ARPA), subject to public comment, which it did not do. Failing to do so voids a protocol DOC adopted in May 2014, the court ruled, tossing out the state's means of execution via a fatal 3-drug cocktail that has never been used in any state or federal execution.

"Finding the General Assembly has not exempted the DOC from ARPA and that the statutory definition of 'rule' clearly includes the DOC's execution protocols, we reverse," Baker wrote for the Court in Roy Lee Ward v. Robert E. Carter, Jr., Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Correction, and Ron Neal, Superintendent of the Indiana State Prison, in their official capacities, 46A03-1607-PL-1685.

The ruling remands the case brought by Ward to LaPorte Circuit Court, where Judge Thomas J. Alevizos previously dismissed the suit.

Ward was sentenced to death in 2007 for the 2001 rape and murder of 15-year-old Stacy Payne in Spencer County. He is 1 of 12 people on Indiana's death row at the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City.

The panel rejected the state's argument that the lethal injection statute says the DOC "may" adopt rules under the administrative code to administer capital punishment. "We disagree," Baker wrote, noting the lethal injection statute must be read in conjunction with ARPA, which specifically excludes 2 state agencies, neither of which is the DOC.

"If the legislature intended to exempt the DOC from the purview of ARPA altogether, or even to attempt to exempt the DOC's execution protocols, it could have easily done so, but it has not," Baker wrote for the panel that also included appellate judges Michael Barnes and Terry Crone.

Fort Wayne attorney David Frank of Christopher C. Myers & Associates represented Ward. "We're very pleased with the ruling. I think the message, the takeaway, is that even though jails and prisons are entitled to some deference, they're not entitled to carry out serious matters of the public's business in secret, and that???s exactly what the state was trying to do," Frank said.

A spokesman for the Indiana Attorney General's Office did not immediately reply to a message seeking comment on the ruling.

The Attorney General's Chief Counsel of Appeals Steve Creason during oral arguments last month suggested to the COA that the legislature had not required the Department of Correction to enact a rule for drugs used in lethal injection, and that's why it wrote the agency "may" adopt such rules.

Rulemaking under ARPA, he argued, was "completely unworkable as a potential solution." Barnes challenged Creason on that contention, as well as his assertions that death penalty cases by their nature receive extensive individual scrutiny in state and federal courts before executions are carried out, and that requiring the ARPA rulemaking processes would not further the purposes of administrative procedures.

"Is it not something to consider," Barnes said, "that if the state puts into effect the machinery of death for a person that the way in which that penalty is delivered and carried out ought to be subject to some sort of review by whatever body other than the people who are, in fact, doing it?"

"That might be valuable," Creason replied, "except that scrutiny, that review (by courts), that is going to happen regardless of whether you do the rulemaking." Creason argued, "... ARPA can be used as a tool to frustrate and delay the execution of death sentence."

Frank said Thursday the state sought to characterize Ward's suit as an attempt to bar the death penalty, which he said wasn???t the case. No executions are currently scheduled, so the immediate impact of the ruling remains uncertain.

The DOC "was trying to issue a new lethal injection protocol by themselves that has never been used," Frank said. "Before we execute a human being in manner that's never been done before in the history of country, maybe we should have some public discussion on it."

The DOC protocol includes a never-before-tried drug called methohexital (known by the brand name Brevital), along with pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride.

"The Court of Appeals wasn't questioning the state's ability to carry out executions lawfully, all they were saying in agreeing with Mr. Ward is that an individual who is condemned to death has right to be subjected to execution in a lawful way, and in a way that the public has knowledge of," Frank said. "So if the state intends to lawfully execute individuals, it should have no problem whatsoever with the Indiana Court of Appeals opinion."

(source: The Indiana Lawyer)






ARKANSAS:

Court upholds Arkansas death-row inmate's conviction


The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the conviction of a man who was sentenced in Benton County Circuit Court to death for killing a 6-year-old girl.

According to prosecutors at his trial, on the night of Nov. 19, 2012, Zachary Holly entered the home where the girl, identified in court papers as J.B., was sleeping, woke her, picked her up and took her to a nearby vacant house, where he raped her and then tied her pants around her neck and strangled her.

Holly received a death sentence for capital murder, two life sentences for rape and kidnapping, and a 20-year sentence for residential burglary.

On appeal, Holly, now 32, argued that the trial judge should have dismissed the burglary charge, should not have allowed a confession Holly made to police to be admitted as evidence, and should have allowed jurors to be told that Holly had offered to plead guilty to capital murder.

Holly claimed he had a key to the home because he and his wife often babysat J.B. and that he entered through an unlocked door. He said he had authority to enter the home and that he entered looking for medicine for an upset stomach and not with intent to commit a felony, so the charge of residential burglary did not apply.

"This argument is not persuasive," the Supreme Court said Thursday in an opinion written by Judge Josephine Hart.

The court said J.B.'s mother testified that she had given Holly's wife permission to enter the home when she needed medicine but did not testify that she had extended the same authority to Holly. The court said it would not consider Holly's claim that he entered the home without intent to commit a felony because Holly did not make that argument during his trial.

Holly also claimed that at the urging of police, his wife, Amanda Holly, coerced him into talking to police, which he argued amounted to the police improperly using a proxy to elicit a confession after he had asked for a lawyer.

The Supreme Court said testimony at the trial showed Amanda Holly did urge her husband to talk to police and submit to a polygraph test, but she did so for her own reasons, believing he was innocent and should "clear his name."

Holly further claimed that during the penalty phase of the trial, jurors should have been allowed to hear that he had offered to plead guilty to capital murder. Jurors could have seen this as a sign that he accepted responsibility for his crime and considered it a mitigating factor, he argued.

The Supreme Court disagreed.

"Proof that Holly offered to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sanction is not evidence that Holly was taking responsibility for his crime," Hart wrote in the opinion.

Justice Rhonda Wood wrote in a separate opinion that she concurred in the decision to uphold Holly's conviction but found it "troubling" that Holly - who claimed to read at a 3rd-grade level - received 2 mental evaluations, but only the first evaluation was entered into the record. All that is in the record regarding the 2nd evaluation is a statement by a lawyer for Holly that he was fit to proceed, Wood noted.

Wood said she hopes the issue will be fully developed and resolved in future proceedings on the question of whether Holly had adequate counsel.

(source: arkansasnews.com)






OREGON:

Christian's public defenders preparing for death-penalty case----Accused killer's public defenders prepare


The public defenders representing Jeremy Christian are gearing up for a possible death penalty case.

Inside the Portland office of Metropolitan Public Defender Services, Executive Director Lane Borg knows his staff is taking on one of its highest-profile cases in a long time.

"These are all horrible cases," he said. But said that won't keep the lawyers from doing their job.

"Lawyers in my office - staff in my office - really believe they're making society better by holding the government to a higher standard, by saying, 'You don't get an easy pass, you don't get to just convict someone,'" Bog said. "We don't lynch people in the streets anymore and drag them out because we feel passionately strong about that."

There is no denying that passion and evidence appear to be plentiful in this case. Court documents show the brutal stabbings on the MAX train were caught on video, along with Christian???s confession in the patrol car after the attack.

"What physically happened, the movement of people, what you see on camera, is only part of the equation in a criminal case," Borg said.

The defense lawyers and their investigators will try to find facts that might alter the perception of what the video captured.

"Somebody can commit the physical act of killing another person, a homicide," Borg said. "But if their mental state is such that they have a belief certain things are going on - that something is happening to them - that can raise certain defenses, like self defense," he said.

Borg said the lawyers don't know if they'll go after an insanity defense. He pointed out that they don't even have an indictment.

But he suspects the indictment will charge Christian with aggravated murder, making it a death-penalty case under Oregon law.

Borg said there are more than a dozen aggravating factors in a killing that can kick it up to aggravated murder.

"Killing a law enforcement officer. Killing a witness in a crime. I believe the one that they will use in this case - there may be others - but will be that there are multiple victims in a criminal episode," Borg said.

He added that if Christian faces the death penalty, his team is required to look back 2 generations in Christian's family to find mental illness or other issues that would explain his actions.

The guidelines for lawyers handling death penalty cases is 178 pages long, Borg said, which is why it will likely be a year or more before Christian goes to trial.

(source: KGW news)






USA:

Supreme Court Plaza Is No Place for Protests


A federal judge dismissed claims from 2 religiously motivated anti-war protesters who challenged the prohibition of political speech on the grounds of the Supreme Court.

The two want to hold candlelight and prayer vigils in the large oval plaza immediately outside the Supreme Court, rather than the sidewalk, to which federal law has relegated free speech activities.

John Payden-Travers and Midgelle Potts said their religious beliefs compel them to speak out against war, torture and the death penalty, and that the law violates their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Citing D.C. Circuit precedent, however, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found Wednesday that law does not substantially burden the free exercise of their religion because it restricts "only one of a multitude of means by which plaintiffs could engage in their religiously motivated activity."

"Plaintiffs have not alleged that this is the only way or only place plaintiffs could pursue these religious convictions, and it is clearly not," the 12-page ruling states. "Plaintiffs could speak out against and distance themselves from torture, war or the death penalty in countless ways."

Potts has protested outside the Supreme Court and says her Unity Christian faith compels her to pray and speak out against the death penalty, war and torture.

Payden-Travers identifies as a post-denominational Christian and says he once led an organization that advocates for laws that would allow anti-war proponents to direct their taxes for non-military purposes.

He has chanted on the sidewalk outside the Supreme Court in opposition to the death penalty, and has twice held up a banner there that states "STOP EXECUTIONS."

Payden-Travers argued that a vigil on the sidewalk, rather than the plaza, during nights when executions are taking place would not sufficiently signal to the public his conscientious objection to the Supreme Court's approval of the death penalty.

Kollar-Kotelly found that argument unpersuasive.

"Plaintiffs do not allege in their complaint that their religions require them to demonstrate and pray in ways such that the public will associate their activities with the United States Supreme Court," she wrote. "It simply alleges that their religions require them to 'speak out' and 'distance themselves' from certain practices, such as the death penalty."

Kollar-Kotelly added that her ruling passes no judgment on the sincerity of the plaintiffs' religious beliefs.

The law they challenged is Section 6135 of the U.S. Code, which makes it "unlawful to parade, stand, or move in processions or assemblages in the Supreme Court Building or grounds, or to display in the Building and grounds a flag, banner, or device designed or adapted to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement."

Kollar-Kotelly had stayed the matter pending the outcome of a similar case before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that also challenged restrictions on demonstrations in the Supreme Court Plaza.

The D.C. Circuit held in Hodge v. Talkin that the Supreme Court plaza is not a public forum, which allows the government to impose reasonable speech restrictions in that space.

It also found that Section 6135 does not target specific viewpoints, and that the restrictions "reasonably served the government's 'long recognized interests in preserving decorum in the area of a courthouse and in assuring the appearance (and actuality) of a judiciary uninfluenced by public opinion and pressure.'"

(source: Courthouse News)

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to