June 23
TEXAS:
Death Watch: New Rodney Reed Filing----Death row inmate's lawyers seek retrial
Attorneys for death row inmate Rodney Reed have filed a supplement to the Feb.
2015 brief seeking a retrial on his death penalty case, arguing that new
evidence has come their way that further indicates that Reed is not responsible
for the April 1996 murder of Stacey Stites.
The brief, filed June 7 to the Court of Criminal Appeals and Reed's trial court
in Bastrop, points to a conflicting detail in the timeline of former Giddings
Police Officer Jimmy Fennell, Stites' fiance and the man Reed defenders believe
is actually responsible for killing Stites. Since Fennell first gave his
official statement to police 2 days after Stites' body was found, the
understanding was that he spent the night of April 22 at home with his fiancee
- beginning at 8pm or 8:30 - and that he slept through her early morning
departure for work at H-E-B. (Fennell testified in court to this chronology, as
well.) But according to a recent interview with Curtis L. Davis - a Bastrop
County Sheriff's deputy who at the time was one of Fennell's best friends -
Fennell told Davis that he spent the night of April 22 drinking beer with
fellow police officers by his truck after Little League baseball practice.
Davis said Fennell told him the next morning that he didn't return home to
Stites until 10 or 11 o'clock that night.
Reed's lead counsel, Innocence Project attorney Bryce Benjet, explained in the
19-page brief that Davis revealed this conflicting detail during an April
interview with CNN. The network is currently producing a special for its show
Death Row Stories about Reed's case and the efforts to save his life. (Indeed,
the Chronicle was in Living???ston, where death row inmates are housed, when
CNN's crew interviewed Reed.) Benjet wrote that he had not been aware of the
interview until one of CNN's producers asked Benjet to comment "about certain
statements made by Officer Davis." He said that a producer of the show allowed
him and an assistant to view "portions of the interview with Officer Davis and
to briefly review a transcript of the entire interview." CNN declined to
release a copy of the interview or the transcript for use with the filing.
Benjet expects the "relevant portions" of the recording to be part of the
special when it airs. A representative for CNN told the Chronicle that there is
currently no airdate for the episode.
Benjet argues that Fennell's conflicting chronologies concerning how he spent
the evening before Stites' murder further represents evidence of Fennell's
consciousness of guilt, and that the notion of his drinking well into the night
on April 22 would put him out of his and Stites' apartment at a time that 3
forensic pathologists have concluded was the actual time that Stites was
killed. The state's theory holds that Stites was abducted by Reed and killed on
her way to work on April 23, around 3am. Reed's Feb. 2015 petition for a
retrial was rooted in the scientific conclusion that Stites actually died
before midnight, on April 22, and that her body was moved from one location to
another after she had been killed. The 2015 filing also notes that Davis
accompanied Fennell through much of what the state accepts to be his discovery
process of his red pickup truck after the murder, and notes how Davis signed
out of a 12-hour work shift on April 22 after only 1 hour because of what he
described as a "broken tooth." Davis then spent the next 3 days away from work
on leave for a "personal death." The filing further notes how there is no
documentation of any attempt by the police to interview Davis or otherwise
establish whether he could have driven Jimmy Fennell home after dispensing of
Stites and the truck.
The idea that Fennell was providing conflicting statements in the aftermath of
Stites' murder aligns with six other instances listed by Benjet in the initial
2015 application for a rehearing. Benjet also implies that Fennell provided
false testimony during trial, and that the state's failure to provide this
information on trial constitutes a violation of due process under Brady v.
Maryland. (Fennell is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence that began in
2008 after he accepted a plea deal on charges that he raped a woman while on
duty as a police officer in nearby Georgetown.)
"In this case, the State failed to disclose Fennell's inconsistent statement as
to his whereabouts on the night of April 22, 1996," Benjet wrote. "Even though
the trial prosecutors may not have been aware of what Officer Davis learned
from Fennell, Officer Davis was a Bastrop County Sheriff's Officer. And the
[BCSO] was the lead agency investigating Stacey's murder. Accordingly, Officer
Davis' knowledge of what Fennell told him is imputed to the State."
Reed most recently faced an execution date of March 5, 2015, but saw his
execution stayed 2 weeks earlier, as the Court of Criminal Appeals sought more
time to review the merits of the claims made in his Feb. 2015 filing. There is
currently no timetable for advancements in his case.
(source: Austin Chronicle)
CONNECTICUT:
Resentencing For death row Inmate Peeler Scheduled for July 1
Russell Peeler Jr., sent to death row for ordering the 1999 killings of Karen
Clarke and her 8-year-old son Leroy "B.J." Brown in Bridgeport, is scheduled to
be resentenced in Superior Court to life in prison without the possibility of
release on July 1, attorneys and court officials said Wednesday.
Peeler, 44, will be the second of Connecticut's 11 formerly condemned prisoners
to be resentenced since last month's Supreme Court ruling that spared their
lives. The justices initially outlawed capital punishment for all in an August
2015 ruling, but the decision was appealed by prosecutors.
Cheshire home invasion killer Steven Hayes was resentenced last week in New
Haven Superior Court to 6 consecutive life sentences without the chance for
parole. Hayes' accomplice, Joshua Komisarjevsky, is scheduled for resentencing
on July 26 in Superior Court in New Haven.
Peeler was sentenced to death in 2007 after a Superior Court jury in Bridgeport
convicted him of ordering his younger brother, Adrian Peeler, to kill Clarke
and her son at a Bridgeport apartment. The boy and his mother were slated to
testify against the older Peeler at an upcoming murder trial.
Adrian Peeler, 38, is serving a 20-year prison sentence for his role in the
slayings.
According to trial testimony, the Peelers ran a lucrative crack cocaine ring
and Leroy witnessed an attempt by Peeler to shoot his mother's boyfriend in a
drug-money dispute. Peeler went after the boyfriend a second time, killing him.
Days before Peeler was to be tried for the slaying, Clarke and her son were
found shot to death in their Bridgeport apartment.
Peeler was convicted of capital felony charges in 2000 but a jury deadlocked on
whether to sentence him to death. A judge then imposed life in prison without
the possibility of release. Prosecutors successfully appealed the judge's
decision, arguing that the judge should have declared a mistrial instead.
Though the high court also agreed with a challenge by the defense of the trial
court's refusal to permit disclosure of a witness's psychiatric records to the
jury, the justices said the mistake was harmless and ordered a new sentencing
hearing for Peeler in which jurors voted for death.
The Supreme Court's 5-2 decision last month, which upheld its landmark August
2015 ruling that said capital punishment in Connecticut is unconstitutional,
overturned Peeler's death sentences and ordered the lower court to impose a new
punishment of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Connecticut legislators abolished the death penalty in 2012 with the caveat
that the new law apply to future capital crimes committed in Connecticut and
that executions for those who committed capital crimes before the repeal could
still take place. Attorneys representing those on death row argued in legal
challenges that the new law violated the condemned inmates' constitutional
rights.
Erskine McIntosh, one of Peeler's attorneys, said a life sentence is "the
correct disposition" in the Peeler case.
"There were any number of legal theories that I believe would have resulted in
the disposition we have today," McIntosh said.
(source: Hartford Courant)
PENNSYLVANIA:
Philadelphia Attorneys Balk at Post-Conviction Appointments
Philadelphia's First Judicial District has started taking steps to alleviate
its growing backlog of post-conviction appeal cases that was uncovered earlier
this year, but the court's methods have angered some attorneys and left many
wondering if indigent defendants will receive adequate representation.
Philadelphia judges recently sent a letter to court-appointed attorneys telling
them to start handling Post-Conviction Relief Act cases. However, according to
attorneys, many who received the letter do not have experience handling PCRA
cases, which can be very complex, and attorneys have found it difficult to be
taken off the cases.
Ronald L. Greenblatt of Greenblatt, Pierce, Engle Funt & Flores, who serves on
the executive committee of the Philadelphia chapter of the Pennsylvania
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said he has been approached by several
lawyers who are worried they do not have the experience to properly handle the
cases. He said some attorneys feel the court is pressuring them to stay on the
cases, as they have been told they will no longer receive any court-appointed
work if they refuse the PCRA cases.
"I'm never telling people what to do, but I wouldn't recommend attorneys taking
these," said Greenblatt, who does not do court-appointed work. "I wouldn't do
it. There's no consideration of the courts about the time [requirements.]
There's no appreciation for the difficulty of the work."
PCRA appeals, according to most attorneys, are very difficult to handle, and
require, not only a lot of work, but also experience in identifying improperly
handled evidentiary issues and questions of law.
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Administrative Judge Jacqueline Allen said
the PCRA appointments are being made under the normal appointment protocol.
Allen said the court recently held an orientation program for civil division
judges, who are now handling PCRA cases along with judges from the trial
division, but she has not received negative feedback from attorneys about the
appointments, or any issues about withdrawing from cases.
"We look forward to the continuing working relationship with those attorneys
who have made themselves available to take on this significant and important
work," she said.
Judge Leon W. Tucker, supervising judge of the criminal division in
Philadelphia, did not return calls for comment.
The court has taken some steps to address the competency concerns by organizing
a $50, 3-hour continuing legal education class focusing on how to handle these
cases. Temple University Beasley School of Law Professor Jules Epstein, who
helped develop and put on the CLE, said the class was an important step. "PCRA
practice, to be done properly, requires a tremendous knowledge of both law and
procedure," he said. "To make sure the system works, we need lawyers who have
the knowledge, and we need to be ready to pay them for their time and efforts."
(source: The Legal Intelligencer)
**********
Death Penalty is on the table judge tells Eric Frein
A Pike County judge has rejected the plea by attorney for Eric Frein to take
the death penalty off the table of his upcoming murder trial.
Judge Gregory H. Chelak says the death penalty has been previously upheld in
Commonwealth courts when applied to capital murder cases, so the option is
available in the Frein case.
Frein's attorneys cited several reasons why they believe the death penalty
would be an unfair, inhumane form of punishment - the judge didn't agree.
He also rejected Frein's request to have the Aggravating Circumstances which
raised the case to death penalty status removed.
Frein is charged with killing one Pennsylvania State Trooper in 2014 and
critically wounding another after he allegedly ambushed them at their Pike
County Barracks.
The Pike County District Attorney has yet to state publicly whether he will ask
for the death penalty.
(soruce: pahomepage.com)
***************
Request to bar death option in trooper ambush case denied
A Pennsylvania judge has denied a pair of defense requests that sought to
prevent prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against a man charged with
fatally ambushing a state police trooper near a rural barracks.
Attorneys for Eric Frein (freen) had said the death penalty option was
unconstitutional. A Pike County judge rejected the claims on Friday.
Frein is charged with fatally shooting Cpl. Bryon Dickson II and wounding
another trooper in September 2014.
He led police on a tense 48-day manhunt before U.S. marshals caught him about
30 miles from the shooting scene. Frein has pleaded not guilty.
Court documents say Frein spoke of wanting to start a revolution in a letter to
his parents and called Dickson's slaying an "assassination" during a police
interview.
(source: Associated Press)
FLORIDA:
Murder case sentencing on hold for death penalty ruling
The former ice cream truck driver accused of killing 2 and injuring 4 others
may not face the death penalty, in spite of prosecutors' requests.
They argue Michael Keetley was seeking revenge when he armed himself with a gun
and started shooting at people standing on the front porch of a Hillsborough
County home.
Prosecutors want Keetley to pay for the alleged crimes with his life, but a
Hillsborough judge put the brakes on a possible death sentence, based on the
latest ruling that Florida's death penalty is unconstitutional.
Attorney Anthony Rickman reviewed the decision for FOX 13 News and said, "we
are back where we started 3 months ago where we have no death penalty in
Tampa."
In her ruling, Hillsborough Judge Samantha Ward said state lawmakers did not go
far enough when they rushed a new law in March.
Legislators were reacting to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in January that
struck down Florida's death penalty procedures because it gave all the power to
a judge and not a jury. Lawmakers fixed that part, but did not require the
jury's decision to be unanimous.
Instead, a jury could sentence someone to death on a 10 to 2 vote.
"What the judge said is, that is unconstitutional... The Sixth Amendment of the
Constitution requires a unanimous verdict, not a majority of 10, or super a
majority of 10," explained Rickman.
Judge Ward's decision comes on the heels of a similar ruling by a Miami judge.
Both decisions will be appealed, Rickman believes, all the way to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
Rickman said it could all have been avoided.
"They rushed, they made it to try to appease everybody. They created a statute
that had constitutional flaws, " said Rickman.
Those flaws, Rickman says, will be seized by a murder defendant who may be
trying to plead guilty in an effort to dodge death and get a life sentences
instead.
(source: Fox News)
**************
State seeks death penalty against Sievers, Rodgers
The State Attorney's Office filed notice Wednesday that it will seek the death
penalty against both Mark Sievers and Jimmy Ray Rodgers in connection with the
June 2015 death of Sievers' wife, Teresa.
The attorneys for both men were officially notified by Assistant State Attorney
Hamid N. Hunter.
Each defendant now has until 20 days before trial to notify of an intention to
present testimony from a mental health professional citing mitigating
circumstances.
Mark Sievers and Rodgers were indicted on 1st-degree murder charges in early
May. Sievers is accused of coordinating with a lifelong friend, Curtis Wayne
Wright, to have his wife killed at the couple's home in Bonita Springs.
Investigators said Wright and Rodgers traveled from their home state of
Missouri to carry out the killing.
Wright pleaded guilty in February to a 2nd-degree murder charge and agreed to
cooperate with prosecutors in exchange for a 25-year prison sentence.
(source: ABC news)
**********
State of Florida will ask for the death penalty at Pablo Ibar retrial----The
Spaniard of Basque descent has already spent 16 years on death row, after a
conviction in the 1990s for a triple-homicide
The State of Florida has announced its decision to ask for capital punishment
for Pablo Ibar, despite the Florida Supreme Court having vacated a death
penalty sentence from the year 2000 and ordered a new trial.
Ibar, a Spanish citizen of Basque descent, was convicted of a 1994 triple
homicide of a nightclub owner and 2 models. He has already served 22 years in
prison, 16 of them on death row.
Andres Krakenberger, a spokesman for the Pablo Ibar Association Against the
Death Penalty, told reporters at a news conference on Tuesday that the defense
had received the state's notification. He said the decision was "predictable,"
though it has caused "profound disappointment," given that the prosecution is
pressing charges against someone who has "clear proof of his innocence."
A spokesman for Ibar claims that he was wrongly convicted and has already had
to serve 16 years on death row
Krakenberger said Ibar was wrongly convicted and has already had to serve 16
years on death row, while the Florida Supreme Court agrees that the "scant"
evidence against him is "weak."
The court vacated the conviction in February saying: "Ibar's DNA was not found
on a blue t-shirt recovered from the crime scene that was allegedly used to
partially cover the face of the perpetrator, whom the state claimed to have
been Ibar. [...] Ibar never confessed to the crime as he steadfastly proclaimed
his innocence [and] presented an alibi as to his whereabouts."
The spokesman criticized "the coldness" of the notification the defense
received. Krakenberger said it shows that capital punishment is seen as a
"procedure" in the United States despite the fact that it is "cruel, inhumane
and degrading" and "has no place in the 21st century."
Krakenberger told reporters that Ibar, who was transferred from death row to a
county jail earlier this month, received the news with "a certain resignation,"
though he said, speaking broadly, that he was in good spirits because his
situation "has improved."
Ibar's defense team needs $1.3 million to mount their case. They still need to
raise $590,000. The defendant has received $50,000 for his legal fees from the
Basque Country government, regional organizations and private individuals who
have donated to the cause through the association's website.
(source: El Pais)
ALABAMA:
Court hears arguments over competency of Alabama death row inmate
An appellate court will hear arguments over whether strokes have left a
65-year-old Alabama inmate mentally incompetent to be executed.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a hearing Thursday in the case
of inmate Vernon Madison. The appellate court in May stayed Madison's execution
just 7 hours before he was scheduled to receive a lethal injection.
Madison was convicted in the 1985 killing of Mobile police Officer Julius
Schulte. Prosecutors said Madison crept up and shot Schulte in the back of the
head as he sat in his police car.
Lawyers for Madison argue that stroke-induced dementia have left Madison
incompetent. Attorneys for the state say while his health has deteriorated,
Madison still has an understanding of the crime he committed and the punishment
he faces.
(source: Associated Press)
***************
Man returned to Alabama's death row in 2010 slayings of 3
A man convicted in the 2010 shooting deaths of 3 people, and dumping their
bodies along Birmingham-area roads, was re-sentenced this week to death and
returned to Alabama death row after an appeals court recently ruled he had not
been properly sentenced the 1st time.
Marcus Benn had been sentenced in January 2015 for his conviction on s7 capital
murder charges involving the slayings of Jaime Gutierrez, Jose Colderon, and
Evelyn Peralta. 3 of the capital murder counts were for having been convicted
of murder in the 20 years prior to when the 3 were killed.
Jefferson County Circuit Judge Tracie Todd held a sentencing hearing for Benn
in December 2014, but held off and made a written ruling more than a month
later imposing the death penalty based in part on the jury's recommendation.
Benn argued in his appeal to the Alabama Criminal Court of Appeals that Todd
should have pronounced his sentence in open court. The appeals court agreed in
a decision on June 3.
"Specifically, Benn asserts that, because the circuit court did not pronounce
his sentence in open court, a judgment of conviction was never entered and his
appeal is not ripe," according to the opinion.
On Tuesday in a hearing that lasted no more than a few minutes, Benn was
brought before Todd and she re-sentenced him to death.
"We're just happy that justice was served in this case and the judge followed
the jury's recommendation," Deputy Jefferson County District Attorney Danny
Carr said after Tuesday's hearing.
Ken Gomany, 1 of Benn's attorney, said Benn can now continue his appeal.
Marcus Benn, 38, in October was found guilty in the deaths of Jaime Luna
Gutierrez, Jose Manuel Martinez Calderon, and Evelyn Peralta. A jury
recommended death.
Benn, 40, was found guilty in the slayings in October 2014. The jury voted 10-2
to recommend he be sentenced to death.
Gutierrez, Calderon and Peralta were killed Dec. 27, 2010 and Benn was charged
3 days later.
Benn testified at his trial that he shot the 2 men because he was afraid for
his life.
Gutierrez was shot numerous times - including 4 shots to the back of the head -
and his body was left on 22nd Street off Ishkooda-Wenonah Road. Midfield police
investigating a burned-out truck off Hartman Industrial Boulevard found
Peralta's body in a nearby ditch. She was partially dressed and had been shot
twice in the back of the head. Benn denied any knowledge of or involvement in
Peralta's death.
After his arrest, Benn led investigators to Calderon's body, which was found in
the 3500 block of Carver Avenue.
Birmingham police found a blood-stained jacket and 2 guns when they searched
the home of Benn's girlfriend, an evidence technician testified. Blood on the
jacket and on a pistol matched the victims.
Benn had been convicted of reckless murder in 1994 in the drive-by shooting -
he was the driver not the shooter - of Parrish Tabb, 18, on April 1, 1993 on
Dennison Avenue. He had originally been charged with capital murder in that
case. He was released from prison in 2009 after serving 16 years.
Bill Myers and Philip Petersen also represented Benn. Deputy Jefferson County
District Attorney Neal Zarzour also prosecuted the case.
(source: al.com)
LOUISIANA:
Local attorney compares Angola death row to POW hot boxes
U.S. District Judge Brian Jackson questions why the state has spent more than
$1 million fighting to prevent air conditioning from being installed at
Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola.
In 2013, three death row inmates with medical problems filed a lawsuit against
the state to get relief from the extreme heat and humidity at the prison.
Currently, heat remediation measures consist of one cold shower each day, ice
chests in cells and fans outside of cells.
Previously, Jackson ruled that the prison must keep the heat index at or below
88 degrees, stating it is unconstitutional to keep inmates in a building where
the heat exceeds 88 degrees.
On June 15, Jackson heard testimony about the effectiveness of the measures
implemented by the prison to keep prisoners cool. In April 2014, the state
spent $29,000 hiring a private firm to monitor heat levels on death row,
according to a report by the Associated Press. The total amount spent on the
lawsuit so far is $1,067,000, and the case is still in litigation.
"Inmates spend 23 hours a day in their cell, under stifling heat and humidity,"
Peter Russell, managing partner with McBride & Russell Law Firm, LLC recently
told the Louisiana Record. "It's similar to the hot boxes where POWs were held
in Vietnam. Louisiana's death row looks like a throwback to the 1920s."
Russell believes that society has "dehumanized death row inmates, but it's not
a partisan issue." The tough-on-crime culture created the attitude that the
"criminal isn't deserving of respect." The reality is that everyone has basic
human rights, Russell said.
"The state of Louisiana needs to do the right thing," he said. "It's just basic
human dignity. The governor could order the prison to find money for the AC
unit."
The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but Russell
explained that the government has protections at both the state and federal
levels.
"Judges tend to err on the side of government due to limited resources," he
said.
Some prisons in Louisiana have air conditioning and some do not, according to
Russell.
The Department of Corrections (DOC) insists that the refusal to provide air
conditioning isn't political in nature. The DOC is concerned that this lawsuit
could force the state to accommodate other prisoners. According to the
Governor's Executive Fiscal Budget 2016-2017, the Correction Services budget is
facing a $94 million budget cut over last year. Louisiana State Penitentiary
will lose $26 million from its annual budget.
Jackson is trying to find solutions to keeping prisoners cool.
Both sides have until July 11 to submit memos on other measures that could be
implemented to control heat and humidity on death row. Last year, the 5th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals determined that any remedy should be limited to the 3
plaintiffs who filed the suit, not all 85 inmates who currently reside on death
row.
In Texas, a federal judge just certified a class-action lawsuit for 1,400
inmates who are suing the state to install air conditioning in prisons to
prevent heat-stroke deaths. In 2011, 10 Texas inmates died from heat stroke
while at Wallace Pack Unit in Navasota.
(source: louisianarecord.com)
_______________________________________________
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
