Oct. 1
TEXAS:
Justices, give Duane Buck a 2nd chance----Inmate on death row because he's
black?
Duane Buck was sentenced to death in Texas because he is black. I know his case
well because I was one of his prosecutors. And as the US Supreme Court
considers his appeal this October, I ask the court to remedy this racial bias.
I served the people of Harris County, Texas, for 25 years as a prosecutor,
helping to remove offenders from our streets and to advocate for justice in our
courts. Buck's case is the only one of thousands of cases I've handled and 150
jury trials I have tried in which I have called for a new sentencing hearing.
In 1997, Buck was prosecuted for capital murder in Houston. Under Texas law,
the state must prove that a defendant constitutes a "future danger" to the
public in order to secure a death sentence. At the sentencing hearing, Buck's
attorneys introduced a now-discredited "expert" who asserted on
cross-examination that Buck's race increased the probability that he would
commit acts of violence in the future.
The prosecutor who elicited that response reiterated the importance of this
expert's opinion on future dangerousness during closing arguments, stating that
the jury should rely on it to conclude that Buck was likely to be a "future
danger." Buck's ineffective defense counsel did not object, and the jury
returned a verdict of death.
What occurred in Buck's sentencing hearing is shocking and cannot stand,
because it renders the resulting sentence of death reprehensible and biased. As
prosecutors, our duty is to ensure, first and foremost, that justice is done.
That is the keystone to guarantee the integrity of the criminal justice system.
Should the integrity of the system fail, it is our duty to acknowledge it and
work diligently to set it right.
In Buck's case, first the system failed when he was represented by ineffective
lawyers who incomprehensibly introduced a racially biased "expert" for the
proceedings -- and then continued to poorly represent Buck during the appellate
process.
2nd, the prosecution failed to provide a fair and just sentencing hearing, free
from racial bias. This was recognized in 2000, when then-Texas Attorney General
John Cornyn, after reviewing all of the cases in which this "expert" testified,
stated that there were 7 defendants whose capital sentencing proceedings were
tainted by the racial bias of the same discredited "expert" and that they were
all entitled to new and fair sentencing hearings.
Cornyn said, "It is inappropriate for race to be considered as a factor in our
criminal justice system." Buck was one of those 7 defendants.
And all of the defendants named by Cornyn received their new sentencing
hearings -- all except Buck. Without reason or explanation, Texas broke its
promise of a fair sentencing hearing. His death sentence, although tainted by
racial bias, still stands.
Third, the criminal justice system failed to protect his constitutionally
mandated right to a fair trial. Numerous studies show that the criminal justice
system has treated African-American men, like Buck, more harshly. For example,
from 1992 to 1999 -- during the time Buck was tried and sentenced to death --
the Harris County District Attorney's office was more than 3 times more likely
to seek the death penalty against African-American defendants than it was to
seek death against a similarly situated white defendant. And, compounding this
systemic bias, Harris County juries were more than twice as likely to impose
death on African-American defendants.
Texas -- as well as the country at large-- has reached a tipping point. But we
have been afforded a rare opportunity to right a past wrong. It is time to
acknowledge the mistakes made in Buck's case and finally ensure that he
receives justice.
On October 5, as the US Supreme Court hears Buck v. Davis, the court will
consider Buck's appeal of a Texas court's decision that his case was not
"extraordinary" enough to merit review on its core issues.
Buck's case, however, is the most extraordinary death penalty case I have ever
encountered. The issues his case raises require a complete and comprehensive
review and demand a remedy free from bias.
In short, Buck deserves a new sentencing hearing. Moreover, the public deserve
to know that the racial bias that has permeated our criminal justice system
will no longer be tolerated, and that we as a nation can and should strive for
a fair and just future for all citizens.
(source: Opinion; Linda Geffin was the second chair prosecutor in Duane Buck's
case while an assistant district attorney in the Harris County District
Attorney's Office. She subsequently held positions as senior assistant county
attorney and chief of the Special Prosecutions Unit for Harris County
Attorney's Office. The views expressed in this commentary are her own---CNN)
NORTH CAROLINA:
Jury starts deliberating on death penalty for Anthony Nguyen
Friday afternoon, a Forsyth County jury started making a difficult decision --
whether Anthony Vinh Nguyen should live or die for the murder of Shelia Pace
Gooden in October 2013 inside her Ardmore home.
The jurors heard 2 1/2 hours of closing arguments this morning in Forsyth
Superior Court. On Tuesday, the same jurors found Nguyen, 24, guilty of
1st-degree murder, 1st-degree kidnapping, 1st-degree burglary and armed
robbery.
. Forsyth County prosecutors allege Nguyen and 2 other men -- Daniel Aaron
Benson, 25, and Steven George Assimos, 24 -- broke into Gooden's house at 700
Magnolia St. in the Ardmore neighborhood. According to prosecutors, Nguyen was
the 1st in the door, armed with a .380-caliber semiautomatic gun and shot
Gooden in the right leg. Benson and Assimos testified that they ransacked the
house for drugs and money. Prosecutors said just before he left, Nguyen shot
Gooden again in the back hallway -- once in the right eye and once in the right
side of the head, killing her.
\Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Martin said today that Nguyen doesn't
deserve mercy. He killed Gooden, 43, a single mother who had 5 children and 5
grandchildren, 4 of whom were born after she died, Martin said. Gooden worked 2
full-time jobs and did everything she could for her son, Cory Joe Prince, who
lived with her, she said.
Gooden didn't deserve to die in her own home, on her knees and crying, Martin
said.
"This defendant is a murderer," she said. "He is a robber. He is a burglar. He
is a kidnapper ... He denied Shelia Gooden her life. She had no one to stand up
for her, to ask for mercy."
Martin had scathing words for Nguyen's family members, who testified Thursday
that Nguyen's mother was neglectful and that Nguyen sought to put his family
first before anything, including money.
Not one family member would admit that Nguyen had ever done anything wrong, she
said.
David Botchin and John Bryson, Nguyen's attorneys, argued that there were
enough mitigating factors for the jury to give Nguyen life in prison without
the possibility of parole.
Botchin said a life sentence is a harsh and severe sentence.
"No matter what anyone tells you, Anthony will be watched over for the rest of
his life," he said.
The jury will have to consider four aggravating factors, including that the
murder was especially heinous, atrocious and cruel. Botchin and Bryson
presented 15 mitigating factors, including that Nguyen was 21 when Gooden was
killed, that he has no previous criminal history and he has family support.
If the jury recommends a death sentence, Nguyen would be the 2nd person in
North Carolina this year to have received the death penalty. Antwan Anthony
received a death sentence earlier this year for killing 3 people at a
convenience store in Pitt County.
North Carolina had 3 other death penalty cases, but the jury chose to recommend
life without the possibility of parole. Another person who was facing the death
penalty chose to plead guilty on the 1st day of the trial.
North Carolina has not executed anyone since 2006. The last person to be
executed was Samuel Flippen, a Forsyth County man convicted of killing his
2-year-old stepdaughter.
The state has had an informal moratorium on executions because of various
lawsuits surrounding the role of doctors. There is also less availability of
lethal injection drugs and litigation is still pending on the now-repealed
Racial Justice Act, which once allowed death-row inmates to challenge their
death sentences if they believed racial bias played a role in their case.
According to the N.C. Department of Public Safety, 150 people are on death row
in North Carolina.
(source: Winston-Salem Journal)
ALABAMA:
Alabama Supreme Court Upholds State's Death Penalty Law----Months after the
U.S. Supreme Court struck down a similar death penalty sentencing system, the
Alabama Supreme Court ruled unanimously that its own system is still
constitutional.
Alabama's Supreme Court unanimously upheld the state's death penalty sentencing
scheme on Friday, 9 months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a similar
system in Florida.
In January, the high court ruled in Hurst v. Florida that the state's
sentencing law was unconstitutional because it relied on "a judge's
factfinding" and not "a jury's verdict" to sentence a person to death.
On Friday, the 8 sitting judges of the Alabama Supreme Court said its law was
sufficiently different, that it remains constitutional - addressing the issue
in a challenge brought by Jerry Bohannon, convicted of murder in 2011.
"[B]ecause in Alabama a jury, not the judge, determines by a unanimous verdict
the critical finding that an aggravating circumstance exists beyond a
reasonable doubt to make a defendant death-eligible, Alabama's
capital-sentencing scheme does not violate the Sixth Amendment," Justice Lyn
Stuart wrote for the court wrote.
"Moreover, Hurst does not address the process of weighing the aggravating and
mitigating circumstances or suggest that the jury must conduct the weighing
process to satisfy the Sixth Amendment."
6 of the remaining 7 justices on the court (Chief Justice Roy Moore has been
suspended from office) joined Stuart's ruling. The final justice, Justice Glenn
Murdock, agreed with the result of the case - affirming Bohannon's death
sentence - but did not join in Stuart's opinion.
Last month, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that its death penalty law was
unconstitutional, citing Hurst.
(source: buzzfeed.com)
OHIO:
Death penalty case opens against Heartless Felon in Warrensville Heights
barbershop shooting, prosecutors to call 17 survivors
Prosecutors opened the death penalty case against suspected Heartless Felon
Douglas Shine Jr. with graphic details of how they say he shot and killed 3
people last year at a Warrensville Heights barbershop.
Shine's defense attorneys appeared poised to turn the case into a whodunnit and
cast doubt over the state's DNA experts and the credibility of its witnesses.
Shine is the 2nd man to face the death penalty in a Cuyahoga County court room
this year. He is accused of opening fire Feb. 5, 2015 in the Chalk Linez
Barbershop located in the 20000 block of Harvard Road. The shooting left 3 dead
and 3 injured.
Assistant County Prosecutor Andrew Santoli told the jury that it will hear from
17 survivors who were inside the barbershop the night of the slayings.
Shine was aiming to kill a man named Walter Barfield, a member of Loyal Always,
a gang with which Shine had an outstanding beef, Santoli said.
Barfield was sitting on the bench inside Chalk Linez with fellow Loyal Always
member Brandon White Ladson when a man wearing a dark hooded sweatshirt walked
in, pulled out 2 handguns and opened fire. The man shot Barfield over 20 times,
then stood over his body and fired two execution style shots directly into his
head, Santoli told the jury.
William Gonzalez, the owner of Chalk Linez, and White both died of single
gunshot wounds.
Shine also faces charges in the death of White's brother, Aaron Ladson, who
gave a recorded video statement to police naming Shine as the barbershop
shooter. Shine is accused of ordering his brother, Kevin McKinney, shoot Aaron
Ladson at his grandmother's house.
"This defendant (Shine) mistakenly believes that the only evidence against him
was the statement and trial testimony of Aaron 'Pudge' Ladson," Santoli said.
McKinney was sentenced to life in prison earlier this year for his role in the
killings.
Aaron Ladson's recorded video statement will be played to the jury. Judge Joan
Synenberg ruled against a motion filed by defense attorneys to exclude the
video evidence.
The jury is also expected to hear from DNA experts who analyzed and found
traces of Shine's DNA on bullets found at the crime scene.
Prosecutors made no mention in their opening statements of imprisoned heroin
kingpin Tevaughn "Big Baby" Darling. In court documents filed in Darling's drug
conspiracy case, the prosecutor's office claimed that Shine carried out the
barbershop shooting at Darling's request after Barfield robbed him during a
card game.
One of several attorney's representing Shine, Russell Tye, asked the jury to
have an open mind when listening to witnesses.
"What I suspect the evidence will show is that on this day, the person who came
into that barbershop was hooded up in an attempt to conceal his face," Tye
said. "This thing didn't happen in slow motion. Whoever came into that
barbershop came in fast. Unfortunately, we have a bunch of (witnesses) in here
who are going to say different things."
He promised to present evidence that there were a number of gang members who
had handled the weapon used in both shootings at a party before the shootings,
including Shine.
"We are not going to sit here and do nothing," Tye told the jury. "This young
man deserves to be represented, and this young man deserves a fair trial."
Prosecutors will begin calling witnesses Monday morning.
(source: cleveland.com)
KENTUCKY:
Judge leaves Ratliff death-penalty eligible
Gregory Ratliff, charged with complicity in the murder of Richmond Police
Officer Daniel Ellis, will be eligible for the death penalty when he stands
trial in July.
Madison Circuit Judge William G. Clouse ruled Friday that a jury could sentence
Ratliff to life without parole, if convicted.
Kentucky allows the death penalty or life without parole as punishment for
capital crimes only when certain aggravating factors are involved. Among the 8
is the intentional killing of a police officer in the line of duty.
In a brief filed Sept. 21, Ratliff???s attorneys argued that state law, a
Kentucky Supreme Court decision and a Legislative Research Commission
commentary recognize fewer aggravating factors when the charge is complicity to
a capital crime.
The more narrow range of factors include killing in conjunction with1st-degree
arson, 1st-degree rape or sodomy, 1st-degree robbery or 1st-degree burglary,
but not murder of an officer, the brief claimed.
In such cases, the brief argued, the LRC commentary applies the phase "act of
killing" only to an "offender who kills" and not an accomplice.
In her response, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Jennifer Smith cited another
case in which the state supreme court upheld an enhanced penalty, life without
parole, for a defendant convicted of complicity in the murder Pulaski County
Sheriff Sam Catron.
She also wrote the capital crimes statute uses "act of killing," "act of
murder" and "offense of murder" interchangeably, without making the distinction
the defense claimed.
"Common sense tells us that the legislative intent would be to subject
defendants involved in the murder of a police officer in the line of duty to
the harshest possible penalty, not a lighter one," Smith wrote.
In court, Clouse said he could not "buy the argument" in this case that the
accomplice is not accused of involvement in "the act of killing."
By "setting a trap" in which the defendant knew the officer would encounter a
man armed with a deadly weapon, the judge asked, would Ratliff not have been an
active participant in the "act of killing" the officer?
However, a jury and not a judge, will make that determination, Clouse said.
While acknowledging the state supreme court may decide differently, Clouse said
no Kentucky trial judge would presume to take that role from a jury.
Also, the court does not have to rely on the LRC's commentary to determine the
legislature's intent when it drafted the statute, said Clouse, a former state
senator.
In addition to complicity in an officer's murder, Ratliff is charged with 2
counts of complicity in the attempted murder of an officer and complicity to
unlawful imprisonment.
Ratliff is represented by Rodney D. Barnes, Nathan W. Goodrich and R. Warren
Beck of the Department of Public Advocacy. All 3 signed the brief and were
present in court Friday, but only Goodrich engaged in verbal exchanges with the
judge.
Sizemore, who is facing charges of murdering a police officer, 2 counts of
attempted murder of a police officer, 1st-degree unlawful imprisonment,
attempted 1st-degree robbery and 2 counts of being a convicted felon in
possession of a handgun, also was in court Friday for a status hearing.
Clouse told the attorneys he intends to try the case in July as scheduled.
Motions, including those for change of venue or separate trials, need to be
filed without delay, the judge said.
Ratliff's attorney's said they would likely seek a separate trial for their
client.
Attorneys for both defendants said they may seek a change of venue, but are
still assessing the climate of public sentiment in light of the publicity the
case has received.
The judge said he was not happy with the media attention the case has drawn but
said, "this is America."
With the trial more than 9 months away, Smith said she believed it was too
early to survey community sentiment to determine if an impartial jury could be
found in Madison County.
Attorney Joanne Lynch said the defense will do all it can to stay on schedule,
but she is still waiting for some results from the Kentucky State Police
laboratory. Smith said she is pushing to have the results expedited.
The judge asked, "Are you moving as fast as you can. Is there anything that I
can do" to keep the case moving forward.
Lynch said nothing would help except procuring funds for the state to hire more
attorneys qualified to defend clients in death penalty cases.
Lynch said she has 2 other murder cases in far western Kentucky, including 1
with 4 victims. Her colleague, Teresa Whitaker, who was in court Friday, also
is working on other high-profile murder cases, Lynch said.
Clouse scheduled another status hearing for Dec. 9. Lynch said she must attend
a court hearing in western Kentucky that day but Lynch would be present then.
Ratliff's attorney said they would be present then.
(source: richmondregister.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
