September 13
MISSOURI:
MO Supreme Court to Consider 21 Year Old Death Penalty Case
The Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments in Jefferson City Wednesday in a
death penalty case that has bounced up and down through the state's court
system for 20 years.
In 2001, Terrance Anderson was convicted for the 1997 killing of his
girlfriend's parents, Stephen and Debbie Rainwater. He was sentenced to death
for the 1st-degree murder of Debbie and life in prison without parole for the
death of Stephen.
Initially, the Supreme Court upheld the lower courts decision. But it ordered
new sentencing in 2006 when it was revealed that a juror had indicated
Anderson's attorneys would have to prove he didn't deserve the death penalty.
The lower bench again sentenced him to death in 2008, and the Supreme Court
affirmed that penalty in a 4-3 decision. But in 2013, the high court again
found his sentencing to be unfair, this time because the judge had conversed
about the case extensively as it was ongoing with the jury foreperson.
The case was once again sent to the lower court with a replacement for the
judge who was instructed to recuse himself. The Supreme Court left the death
sentence in place but ordered a new hearing on Anderson's request to have his
case canceled. Anderson has appealed to the high bench once again after the
circuit court denied his request.
The murders occurred in southeast Missouri's Poplar Bluff, but the case was
tried 85 miles away in Cape Girardeau on a change of venue from Butler County
to Cape Girardeau County.
Anderson's attorneys originally sought a 2nd-degree murder conviction after
what happened on July 25, 1997.
According to court documents, Anderson took a gun to the home of his
girlfriend, Abbey Rainwater, who lived with her parents, Stephen and Debbie.
Earlier in the day, Abbey had told Anderson that she had gotten a restraining
order to keep him away from her and their 3-month-old daughter and that
visitation would be arranged through the court.
After arriving at the residence, Anderson kicked in the door. Mother Debbie was
holding the baby and told Abby to run. Debbie then got on her knees and begged
for her life, but Anderson placed the gun against the back of her head and
fired it, killing Debbie instantly.
Anderson subsequently took the child and went into the front yard. He pointed
the gun at the baby's head and yelled that he would shoot if Abbey did not come
out.
Father Stephen, who had been driving around the neighborhood with a gun after
becoming suspicious when he previously answered the door to find no one,
returned home. The 2 men got into an argument resulting in Anderson shooting
Stephen in the forehead, killing him.
Court documents reveal bad blood existed between Anderson and Stephen. Stephen
had been on disability and suffered from bipolar manic depression. Anderson had
moved in with the Rainwaters for 4 months but was asked to leave because of
conflict.
According to court filings, in previous testimony, one of Anderson's friend
answered the phone with Stephen on the other end. Stephen thought he was
talking to Anderson and referred to him as "nigger" and said he was going to
"whoop your ass". The friend said Stephen further stated that the "black and
white thing" didn't work and Terrance (Anderson) and Abbey shouldn't be
together and Abbey needed "to be with her own kind."
Anderson still was holding the infant after killing Stephen on the night of
July 25th. The police arrived quickly after neighbors called 911 when hearing a
disturbance of pounding on a door while the doorbell was ringing. Anderson
initially yelled at the police to put down their guns but surrendered on their
command and handed over the baby.
At this week's Supreme Court hearing, Anderson's attorney, William Swift,
argued that the lower court had made mistakes that kept juries from reversing
his death sentence. He said the lower bench erred in denying his claim that a
previous lawyer had been ineffective in several ways.
He claimed the defense team in Anderson's 2nd trial failed to investigate the
proceedings of his 1st trial, notably what the original lawyers in his 1st
trial did or did not do in representing him.
Among other things, Swift said a psychiatrist and clinical specialist at Yale
University, Dr. Dorothy Lewis, was not called in the 2nd trial to testify about
the impact on Anderson of his stepfather Robert's violent, abusive behavior.
Lewis' background history investigation of Anderson found no prior history of
violence before the murders and suggested Robert's abusive behavior was linked
to Anderson's unstable state of mind at the time of the crime. She had noted
that one of the numerous child injuries suffered by Anderson, a spiral tibial
fracture, can only be caused by intentional child abuse.
Before the high court, Swift said the injury conclusively proved that Anderson
was mistreated at a young age. "Confronted with the actual substantive abuse to
Terrance (Anderson) himself, I don't see how a jury, a reasonable juror could
step back and say, 'This didn't happen', because you have objective medical
evidence," said Swift.
The attorney also informed the judges of numerous addition wounds sustained by
Anderson, proclaiming the abuse was overwhelming. "You don't get a spiral
tibial fracture unless it's physical abuse," Swift said. "You don't get the
puncture wound that Terrance had. You don't get the scarring that he has or the
cigarette burns on his body."
Swift further said competent counsel in the 2nd trial would have called on
Lewis to provide mitigating evidence that Anderson "suffered from a psychotic
depression characterized by paranoia and delusions while living in
dysfunctional family circumstances."
He also argued that the previous attorney was ineffective for failing to call
stepfather Robert's wife to testify about his violent behavior.
Swift further stated that Anderson's 2nd trial attorney was ineffective because
he advised Anderson to take the stand when other witnesses could effectively
"humanize him" before a jury. He said Anderson was compromised because the
prosecuting attorney repeatedly portrayed him as a liar, especially deserving
of death.
Attorney Richard Starnes represented the state before the Supreme Court. He
disputed most all of Swift's claims.
Starnes said there was no proof that stepfather Robert was responsible for the
injuries sustained by Anderson. "Was there abuse? Probably, the (spiral tibial)
fracture is kind of familiar. Did Robert cause it? We don't know the answer to
that," said Starnes.
In court documents, Starnes noted that Robert worked for the Poplar Bluff
School District and served on the City Council, and even though Anderson was a
10-month-old when he came into Robert's life, Robert treated him like his own
child.
Starnes also attempted to tear down the credibility of Dr. Lewis, noting
Anderson and his sister denied some of the claims Lewis made in her reports.
"She did not have a good grasp of the facts and she was misrepresenting
counsel's clients," Starnes said.
Anderson's appeal was 1 of 4 cases heard by the Supreme Court Wednesday
(September 5th). The judges could render a decision at any time in the future.
(source: ozarksfirst.com)
ARIZONA:
Battle Over Public Access to Executions Rages on
The Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments Wednesday appealing the dismissal of a
case that accused the Arizona Department of Corrections of concealing
information about the state's executions.
Arizona's programs for execution have been under fire for several years. Since
2011, supply chains of lethal-injection drugs have collapsed under global
pressure from death penalty opponents, making it almost impossible for prisons
to source the drugs.
Although the state once used sodium thiopental for its executions, U.S.
manufacturers no longer make the drug, and importing it is illegal. In 2015,
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration blocked a shipment destined for Arizona,
which had paid $27,000 to import it from India.
Instead, the state turned to a combination of the sedative midazolam and the
painkiller hydromorphone - but when it attempted to use the cocktail to execute
convicted double-murderer Joseph Wood in 2014, he survived until the 15th round
of dosing. According to witnesses, Wood was strapped to a gurney for almost 2
hours, snorting and gasping for air. In the wake of Wood's botched execution,
then-Governor Jan Brewer called for a full review of the process.
In May 2016, U.S. District Judge Neil V. Wake dismissed a 2014 lawsuit brought
by Joseph Wood (before his death) and 6 other inmates claiming a lack of
transparency in Arizona's execution process. The lawsuit, which the First
Amendment Coalition later picked up, claims that the new execution drugs were
dangerously under-tested and that the state Department of Corrections' policies
of preserving the anonymity of staff involved in executions unnecessarily
limited public access to important information such as the makeup, lot numbers,
and expiration dates of lethal-injection drugs, as well as the qualifications
of those administering the injections.
On September 12, U.S. Circuit Judges Marsha S. Berzon, Paul J. Watford, and
Johnnie B. Rawlinson heard oral arguments appealing the dismissal.
Representing the inmates, Collin P. Wedel of Sidley Austin argued that a
federal judge's ruling that the press and public have a right to view
executions should be interpreted to mean that those viewing should also
understand each step of the process, from the mixing of the lethal injection
drugs to the final pronouncement of death. Comparing today???s executions to
public hangings, he argued that those viewing would understand the mechanism of
the rope noose.
Much of the discussion centered around the matter of cutting sound from
microphones set up in the execution chamber during the preparation of the drugs
and the placement of the IV. In response to questions from Judge Berzon, Draye
argued that the value of what anyone could learn during those moments was
negligible, while the risk to the corrections staff who might face an "emergent
situation" during which names were spoken or voices identified was high. Wedel
returned to the example of public executions by hanging, during which those who
observed could see, hear, and understand the entire procedure.
Judge Watford challenged the seriousness of Draye's assertion that identified
staff faced dangerous backlash from anti-death-penalty groups.
"Fear doesn't cut it," Watford said.
In a December 2016 settlement, Arizona agreed to never again use midazolam in a
lethal-injection execution. That same month, U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow
ruled that the press and the public have a First Amendment right to view
executions in their entirety.
Arizona currently has 117 inmates on death row, 114 male and 3 female. The
state has not executed a prisoner since Joseph Wood.
(source: Courthouse News)
NEVADA:
Nevada prisons drug buyer knew firms opposed execution use
Nevada's prisons pharmacy chief testified Wednesday that she obtained drugs for
the lethal injection of a convicted killer despite knowing that drug
manufacturers didn't want their products used for executions.
Department of Corrections Pharmacy Director Linda Fox said during questioning
by attorneys representing drug companies that she made the online order of
medications from a third-party supplier, Cardinal Health, and didn't specify
the end use.
She acknowledged she later became alarmed when she learned that the
manufacturer, Alvogen, had notified the state in writing that it didn't want
its products used in executions.
Still, after communicating with prisons chief James Dzurenda, when another
chance came a few days later, Fox bought more.
"Notwithstanding everything you knew coming into these three purchases about
the industry, the publications, about the news, about the letters, the
Department of Corrections ... honored none of those objections, is that right?"
asked James Pisanelli, an attorney representing drug maker Alvogen.
"Yes," Fox said.
Alvogen, Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA and Sandoz Inc. are suing to stop the use of
their products in Nevada's planned execution of inmate Scott Raymond Dozier.
They accuse prison officials of deceiving the public and the companies, and
improperly obtaining Alvogen's sedative, Hikma's opioid fentanyl and a Sandoz
paralyzing drug called cisatracurium for a use the companies say they don't
allow.
Fentanyl, made by several companies, has been blamed for illegal use overdose
deaths nationwide.
State attorneys say Nevada had no contract with the manufacturers, and the drug
makers have no claim of product ownership.
Cardinal Health is not a defendant in the lawsuit, and company officials have
declined requests for comment about the testimony this week before Clark County
District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez in Las Vegas.
Next week, the state Supreme Court is scheduled to hold hearings in Carson City
on a separate bid by state attorneys to put Dozier's execution back on track
for mid-November.
15 states are siding with Nevada in that fight, led by Oklahoma and including
Nebraska, where an inmate was put to death last month using a 4-drug
combination similar to the first-of-its-kind method Nevada developed last year.
The testimony before Gonzalez has provided a glimpse of a problem common to
death-penalty states in the U.S.
Nevada got not one reply despite contacting nearly 250 drug companies and
suppliers in 2016 with a straightforward request to supply medications for an
execution, Dzurenda testified Tuesday.
After Cardinal posted the buyers' list that gave Fox a chance in May to obtain
midazolam, Nevada rescheduled Dozier's execution for July.
Fox acknowledged Wednesday she thought it would look bad if the public learned
that the purchase came just one day after the state Supreme Court heard
arguments about Dozier's planned execution, which had been postponed last year.
"You said, "I'm sure from the outside it will look very contrived that I
received the medication one day after we went to court," Pisanelli told Fox.
"You were also worried what you were going to look like, you and the state,
weren't you?" he asked.
"Sure," Fox said.
(source: Associated Press)
CALIFORNIA:
Mental health hurdles pop up in family dispute double murder case----A double
murder defense is developing after the first court appearance for a man
suspected of killing his daughter-in-law's parents.
A double murder defense is developing, and legal hurdles are already popping up
after the first court appearance for a 65-year old Fresno man suspected of
killing his daughter-in-law's parents.
"Was he competent at the time?" asked legal analyst Ralph Torres. "Was he
insane at the time? We don't know. It's too early to tell. But on its face,
you're talking about premeditated and deliberated killing."
Police say a home surveillance camera recorded the whole crime and 65-year-old
Darshan Dhanjan didn't even give his victims a chance to defend themselves.
But Wednesday's court appearance could be a preview of the issues prosecutors
have to overcome in the case.
Huddled between a translator and his defense attorney, Dhanjan had very little
to say, but it was enough for his attorney to declare doubt as to his mental
competency.
"We will not conduct the arraignment based upon counsel's statement," said
Judge Michael Idiart.
Dhanjan's criminal case is on hold now until a psychiatrist evaluates his
mental condition. In the meantime, his attorney says he'll evaluate the
evidence against his client.
He's charged with murdering 2 people -- the other set of grandparents to the
4-year-old girl who was at home with her mother when police say Dhanjan shot
the victims and threatened to shoot his daughter-in-law as well.
Investigators say the whole thing was caught on camera.
"We will see if there's a video," said Dhanjan's defense attorney, Kojo Moore.
"We will look at the video. A lot of times videos don't depict the whole scene,
but we'll wait to see all the evidence."
Torres says the video could erase any defense except for the mental health
issues, but those could be a real issue with a defendant as old as Dhanjan and
with no criminal history.
"65 years old," the legal analyst said. "You have possible Alzheimer's,
dementia, those type of issues come into play. Why did somebody break down like
that?"
Prosecutors could pursue the death penalty, and Torres says the video is their
ace in the hole even though they won't want to play it in open court.
"But if there is a trial and the death penalty is on the table, it will be
played," he said.
Dhanjan will be back in court in October for a competency hearing, and legal
analysts tell Action News the case could move forward really quickly if he's
found competent to stand trial.
(source: KFSN news)
USA:
Jury in N.Va. case hears from officers who survived fatal shooting
Police officer David McKeown had just kicked in the door of a northern Virginia
home, trying to check on the welfare of a woman who called 911 in a panic
seeking protection from the husband who was attacking her.
As McKeown made his way inside, Army Staff Sgt. Ronald Hamilton was waiting for
him with a military-style rifle.
"All my vision went to was the barrel of the gun," McKeown testified Wednesday,
telling his story of the February 2016 shooting that left 2 people dead,
including a fellow officer, and two others severely injured.
He said he saw the flash of the muzzle but doesn't remember hearing the shots.
"I started feeling the impacts on my body," McKeown said. "I tried to draw my
gun, but my arm stopped working. I knew I needed to get out of the way of the
rifle."
McKeown and the other officer who survived the shooting, Jesse Hempen,
testified at the death-penalty trial of Hamilton. Hamilton is charged with
capital murder in the fatal shootings of his wife, Crystal Hamilton, and
Officer Ashley Guindon, who was working her 1st shift.
Defense attorneys do not dispute that Hamilton shot his wife and the officers,
but argue that he lacked the premeditation necessary for a capital-murder
conviction. They said in opening statements that the Hamiltons' marriage was
troubled and their argument that day was precipitated by his anger over her
plans to attend a male dance revue with friends. They argue that he shot
indiscriminately at the officers without intending to kill them.
McKeown, though, testified that Hamilton was crouched and in a shooting
position when he fired. After McKeown was shot, he said he stumbled off the
porch and fell flat on his face on the Hamiltons' front lawn. He could hear the
blood pumping out of his arm. He got on his radio to alert fellow officers that
shots had been fired and that the shooter had a rifle, which could cut through
any ballistic vests officers would be wearing for protection. And he gave the
code "signal one," which means an officer is in imminent danger.
The code alerts police to "bring the cavalry," McKeown said, his voice breaking
slightly, the only such instance in an otherwise matter-of-fact description of
the shooting and the injuries he suffered.
The testimony Wednesday from McKeown and Hempen was their first public account
of the shooting. McKeown glanced frequently at Hamilton, wearing his military
dress uniform, during his testimony, while Hamilton hung his head and avoided
eye contact, occasionally rubbing his eyes.
Hempen was the 1st officer to arrive, and testified that Hamilton answered the
door and came outside to speak briefly with him. Hamilton insisted that his
wife - who had already been shot - was not in the home, and he refused Hempen's
increasingly insistent demands to be let inside.
McKeown and Guindon, who arrived about a minute after Hempen, arrived to find
Hempen pushing against the front door trying unsuccessfully to keep it open.
After the shooting, McKeown testified that he knew his circumstances were dire
by the reactions of the officers who arrived to render aid.
"They were trying to stay calm, but they were definitely panicked - I could see
their faces and hear their voices," he said.
McKeown said he has had at least 15 surgeries since he was first brought in to
Inova Fairfax Hospital, most of them in an effort to reconstruct a badly
damaged right elbow. He showed his mangled arm to jurors during his testimony
and said he only has limited use of it. He is currently assigned to the
training academy because his recovery is insufficient to resume patrol duties.
"I feel useless," he said.
Hempen, for his part, said after he was shot in the upper leg, he couldn't help
but think of former Washington Redskins star Sean Taylor, who died from a loss
of blood after being shot in the thigh during a home invasion.
Hempen said he tried to use his belt to make a tourniquet around his leg to
stop the bleeding, but his belt "snapped in half. ... Was not too pleased about
that," he said drily, noting he may have shouted some curse words. The wound
created a hole in his leg the size of a baseball, and jurors saw photos of the
significant scarring that remains.
From where he had taken cover, he said he could see Guindon, eyes open and
lying face down on the lawn.
"I felt bad that I didn't know her name," he said. "I was calling out, 'Hang in
there, new girl. Hang in there, new girl.'"
(source: Richmond Times-Dispatch)
_______________________________________________
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
