June 28
TEXAS:
Texas' death penalty beyond repair so think about ending it, judge says
We welcome Judge Elsa Alcala's frank - and courageous - assessment of the Texas
death penalty, not for what people wish the state's capital punishment system
to be, but for what it is: Discriminatory, inefficient and immoral.
That assessment coming from an experienced judge on the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals - the state's highest court in criminal matters - is not easily
dismissed.
It's true that many Texans support the death penalty as a tough, fair and
painless way to punish those convicted of certain heinous crimes. That category
includes crimes in which more than one person was murdered, a law enforcement
officer was killed, or circumstances that involve murder and another aggravated
felony. An example of the latter would be fatally shooting a store clerk during
the course of a robbery, or killing someone during a sexual assault or
kidnapping.
To be sure, those are horrible crimes that warrant the toughest punishment on
the books. The problem with the death penalty is that it is final. Once done,
it cannot be undone. As such, it requires a perfect system in which to operate
justly and morally. An imperfect system means a killer gets away, while an
innocent is imprisoned or executed.
It's no wonder that Alcala has growing discomfort with the Texas death penalty
system, riddled with imperfections. She wrote about them in a recent opinion
regarding the case of Julius Jerome Murphy, sentenced to die for the 1997
shooting death of a man whose car had broken down along Interstate 30 in
Texarkana.
"I think there are, as I said in that opinion, significant problems with the
death penalty," Alcala told the American-Statesman's Chuck Lindell. "There are
lots of problems, and I think the public is not aware of the problems."
Alcala wrote that Texas courts should study whether the death penalty is
unconstitutional because it is arbitrarily imposed by race, disproportionately
affecting minorities, and whether excessive delays in imposing the ultimate
sentence results in cruel and unusual punishment because inmates are held in
solitary confinement for years, if not decades. Those inequities are reflected
in state figures that show 71 % of those awaiting execution in Texas are
African American or Latino.
Alcala came to the bench in 2011, when then-Gov. Rick Perry tapped her to fill
a vacancy. Her doubts and concerns regarding the system have been sown by cases
that came before her, including:
-- Bobby James Moore: Alcala wrote that her court's reliance on a decades-old
standard to measure intellectual disability, which is no longer used by medical
professionals, "is constitutionally unacceptable."
-- Duane Buck: Alcala sharply criticized rulings allowing Buck to be executed
despite trial testimony that he was a future danger to society because he is
black.
Such concerns grabbed the attention of the U.S. Supreme Court, which earlier
this month, announced it would examine the constitutionality of the death
sentences given to Moore and Buck.
Pointing out the flaws in the state's death penalty system takes political
guts, given the wide support it enjoys in Texas, topping 70 % on a recent
Gallup poll. That kind of courage has been in short supply since judge Tom
Price left the state Court of Criminal Appeals in 2014. Before his departure,
Price called for an end to the death penalty, saying he was haunted by a
growing fear that Texas will execute an innocent inmate, if it hadn't already.
He worried aloud whether he had participated in executing an innocent person.
As a long-time judge on the court, Price was part of a body with a dubious
history in death penalty matters. The court still is plagued by its unfortunate
"sleeping lawyer" ruling more than a decade ago refusing to halt an execution
of a death row inmate whose attorney had snoozed through major portions of his
capital murder trial.
Following that embarrassment, there was the "we close at 5" incident in a 2007
case.
Presiding Judge Sharon Keller closed the court clerk's office at 5 p.m.,
preventing attorneys from filing a last-minute appeal for twice-convicted
killer Michael Richard, who ultimately was executed without his final appeal
being heard in court. That prompted the State Commission on Judicial Conduct to
issue a public warning to Keller, but the rebuke was later dismissed on a
technicality after Keller appealed.
Aside from the court's well-documented missteps, there are other signs of the
system's imperfections in the wave of exonerations of Texans, such as Michael
Morton, who were wrongfully convicted and sent to prison for many years, while
the true criminals went free. Oftentimes, the guilty go on to commit more
crimes, which was true in the Morton case in which the person who murdered
Morton's wife, went on to kill another woman.
It's worth noting that Texas led the nation in the number of people wrongly
convicted of crimes, who were exonerated in 2015, according to figures compiled
by the National Registry of Exonerations. In all, 54 people were exonerated for
mostly homicide and drug cases going back to 2004. New York was second with 17.
False identifications by witnesses, misconduct by police or prosecutors, errors
by crime labs or defense attorneys, all are among the things that can and do go
wrong.
It's no wonder Alcala is uncomfortable remaining silent. Doing so perpetuates
the fallacy that the state's death penalty is carried out fairly and justly.
That might be what many wish it to be, but it is not the reality.
(source: Editorial, Austin American-Statesman)
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
Marchand backs legal weed, getting inmate off death row
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Steve Marchand is calling for marijuana
legalization and saying he'd consider commuting the death sentence of New
Hampshire's only person on death row.
In the 3-way Democratic primary, these positions set Marchand apart - and mark
a shift from the views of the 3 Democratic governors who've led New Hampshire
for 18 of the past 20 years. Among them, none supported legalizing marijuana
and only current Gov. Maggie Hassan has backed death penalty repeal, but only
if it doesn't change the death sentence of convicted cop killer Michael
Addison.
Marchand believes he's in line with voters.
"I don't think I'm outside the mainstream of where New Hampshire residents are
on these and other issues," he said Monday.
Marchand's Democratic opponents are Executive Councilor Colin Van Ostern and
former state securities regulator Mark Connolly. Both entered the race earlier
than Marchand, gaining a head start on voter outreach and fundraising. Viewed
by many as the underdog, Marchand - the former mayor of Portsmouth - calls
himself the "most progressive" candidate in the race, but also someone who can
appeal to civil libertarians. Some Democrats question his progressive
credentials.
The primary is Sept. 13.
60 % of New Hampshire voters support legalizing weed, according to the
University of New Hampshire Survey Center, but Marchand is alone in offering
full-throated support. Connolly is "open to" legalization after evaluating how
it's worked in other states, his campaign said. Van Ostern's campaign said he
is "not opposed" to legalization if it is supported by health care
professionals and law enforcement, a group that staunchly opposes it now.
"There was a time not so long ago where somebody who was in favor of marijuana
legislation would've just been laughed off the stage," said Wayne Lesperance, a
political science professor at New England College. "We're not there anymore,"
All 3 Democrats support decriminalization for possessing small amounts of pot;
New Hampshire is the only New England state without such a law.
Marchand's death penalty position is likely less popular. About half of New
Hampshire voters prefer the death penalty for convicted murderers, and
Addison's 2006 murder of Manchester police officer Michael Briggs sparked
statewide outrage.
Like Marchand, Connolly and Van Ostern favor repeal but don't go so far as
advocating a change in Addison's sentence. That's the same position Hassan took
in 2014 when a repeal bill nearly made it through the Legislature.
New Hampshire remains the only New England state with the death penalty.
State law gives the governor, with advice of the executive council, power to
commute a death sentence. Marchand says he'd prefer legislative repeal but
would be open to reducing Addison's sentence to life in prison without parole
through executive means. He called Addison's crime "heinous" and said there is
"no question" of his guilt, but Marchand says his rivals are morally
inconsistent if they want repeal to only apply to future crimes.
"It isn't just immoral in the future, it is also immoral in the present," he
said.
Marchand's stance on both issues shows that he's not worried about being
"cautious," said Andy Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center.
"Despite the success of Democratic candidates for governor, there's a feeling,
a perception, that they haven't implemented policies that activist Democrats
really want," Smith said.
But not all Democrats see Marchand as the progressive he's claiming to be,
pointing to his past involvement with centrist political groups. Kathy
Sullivan, a former state Democratic party chair who is backing Van Ostern, is a
long-time critic of the group "No Labels," where Marchand was recently state
director. The group has backed Republicans and called Donald Trump a "problem
solver" candidate earlier this year. Marchand left shortly after.
"It was like he was no labels on Tuesday and I'm a progressive on Wednesday,"
she said. "No, that doesn't work."
(source: Associated Press)
ARIZONA:
Group wants to appeal decision in lawsuit over death penalty
The First Amendment Coalition of Arizona has asked a judge to clear the way for
it to appeal a ruling last month that dismissed the group from a lawsuit
protesting the way the state carries out the death penalty.
The group had joined death-row inmates in the lawsuit and alleged the state
violated the coalition's First Amendment right of access to governmental
proceeding by deliberately concealing information about executions from the
public.
U.S. District Judge Neil Wake has dismissed the coalition from the case, but
allowed some claims brought by the inmates to continue.
The group is now asking Wake to issue a judgment so it can appeal the decision.
Otherwise, the group must wait until the case concludes.
Executions in Arizona remain on hold until the lawsuit is resolved.
(source: Associated Press)
_______________________________________________
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
