Jan. 4
TEXAS:
Paxton sues FDA for delaying import of death penalty drug
Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Tuesday his office has filed a lawsuit
against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for delaying the state's
importation of a drug used in capital punishment.
The lawsuit argues the FDA's claimed legal grounds for refusing the drugs'
entry into the United States are invalid, citing an FDA exemption for law
enforcement purposes.
Thiopental sodium, also known as Sodium thiopental, is part of the 3-drug
cocktail used in lethal injections.
In its December newsletter, the Council of State Governments said, while Texas
has 317 inmates on death row, it only has enough of a key lethal injection drug
to execute 2 of them, stemming from a nationwide shortage of the drug.
The Attorney General's Office is asking the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas to declare the FDA's delay unlawful and compel the
agency to make a final decision on the admissibility of the drug, which was
detained by the FDA 17 months ago.
"There are only 2 reasons why the FDA would take 17 months to make a final
decision on Texas' importation of thiopental sodium: gross incompetence or
willful obstruction," said Attorney General Paxton. "The FDA has an obligation
to fulfill its responsibilities faithfully and in a timely manner. My office
will not allow the FDA to sit on its hands and thereby impair Texas'
responsibility to carry out its law enforcement duties."
In April 2016, KXAN reported that the FDA blocked an appeal to bring in Sodium
thiopental.
(source: KXAN news)
************************
Supreme Court examines death penalty for the disabled
Bobby James Moore got the death penalty for a murder he committed in 1980 at a
Houston supermarket. But 36 years later, he apparently has a new argument: He
is intellectually disabled and cannot be executed under a 2002 U.S. Supreme
Court ruling. The Supreme Court heard his case at the end of November.
Moore was 21 when he and some friends decided to rob Birdsall Super Market. His
job was to stand guard with a shotgun. Things did not go as planned. Almost
immediately after two clerks in the courtesy booth learned they were being
robbed, one of them screamed.
Moore pointed his shotgun at the second clerk, a 72-year-old man named James
McCarble, and shot him in the head. McCarble died instantly.
Police caught up with Moore 10 days later at his grandmother's house in
Louisiana, where he confessed to the crime.
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled executing the mentally disabled violates the
Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. But the
court left it up to the states to determine mental ability within certain
parameters.
During oral arguments in November, lawyer Clifford Sloan cast Texas as an
oddball state that uses something other than current clinical standards to
diagnose intellectual disability -- a 1992 definition along with other factors
thought up by judges, not scientists.
The Texas appeals court said Moore had abilities that showed he was not so
intellectually disabled as to be exempt from capital punishment. Both sides
agreed Moore had a terrible childhood. He dropped out of school in 9th grade.
His father beat him. He was kicked out of the house at 14. He had 4 felony
convictions by age 17.
"At the age of 13, Mr. Moore did not understand the days of the week, the
months of the year, the seasons, how to tell time, the principle that
subtraction is the opposite of addition, standard units of measurement. And
there are numerous other deficits like that that are undisputed," Sloan said.
Justice Stephen Breyer had his doubts about whether the Supreme Court could
establish a consistent standard for judging mental ability.
Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller argued the state's criteria for
intellectual disability is consistent with Supreme Court precedent as well as
clinical standards. He also noted the legal finding of intellectual disability
is different from a medical diagnosis.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a concern of her own about letting states set
their own standards: "Isn't making it discretionary a huge problem in this
area, because if you let one trial court judge apply it and another one doesn't
have to apply them, then you're opening the door to inconsistent results
depending upon who is sitting on the trial court bench, something that we try
to prevent from happening in capital cases."
The current justices are divided on the much more basic question of whether the
death penalty is constitutional at all, for anyone. Breyer is a frequent critic
of capital punishment, as is Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
In 2014, the court struck down Florida's law that said if an inmate's IQ is
over 70, evidence of other intellectual disability need not be considered.
(source: Baptist Press)
**************
Executions under Greg Abbott, Jan. 21, 2015-present----20
Executions in Texas: Dec. 7, 1982----present-----538
Abbott#--------scheduled execution date-----name------------Tx. #
21---------January 11---------------Christoper Wilkins----539
22---------January 25---------------Kosoul Chanthakoummane----540
23---------January 26---------------Terry Edwards---------541
24---------February 2---------------John Ramirez----------542
25---------February 7---------------Tilon Carter----------543
26---------March 7------------------Rolando Ruiz---------544
27---------March 14-----------------James Bigby-----------545
28---------April 12-----------------Paul Storey-----------546
29---------June 28------------------Steven Long-----------547
(sources: TDCJ & Rick Halperin)
VIRGINIA----impending execution
Decision on delaying Ricky Gray's Jan. 18 execution to come no later than next
week
A federal judge on Tuesday said he will decide within a week whether to delay
Ricky Javon Gray's scheduled Jan. 18 execution over concerns about drugs the
state intends to use if Gray dies by injection.
Midazolam, a sedative, and potassium chloride, which stops the heart, are the
1st and 3rd drugs used in Virginia's 3-drug procedure. The drugs were made by a
compounding pharmacy and not by pharmaceutical manufacturers, which no longer
provide drugs to states for executions.
The state strongly disputes that the compounded drugs - tested by a state
laboratory and made by a licensed Virginia pharmacy and pharmacist - are
anything less than suitable for use in an execution. The alleged problems are
"wholly speculative," said Margaret Hoehl O'Shea with the state Attorney
General's Office.
Under state law, Gray must choose execution by injection or electrocution by 15
days prior to the execution date. If he refuses to select a method, state law
makes lethal injection the default method.
The Virginia Department of Corrections did not immediately respond Tuesday when
asked if Gray had made a choice.
Gray's lawyers also contend death in the state's electric chair is cruel and
unusual punishment. And they claim the use of compounded drugs have contributed
to botched executions elsewhere and unnecessarily increase the risk of
"chemical torture."
They are asking U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson - who heard more than 4 hours
of testimony and argument Tuesday - to delay the execution so they can better
make their case.
An expert testified for Gray on Tuesday that execution by firing squad presents
less risk of cruel and unusual punishment than Virginia's proposed injection
procedure.
Gray was sentenced to die for the New Year's Day 2006 slayings of sisters Ruby
Harvey, 4, and Stella Harvey, 9. He also killed their parents, Bryan Harvey,
49, and Kathryn Harvey, 39, in their South Richmond home, which was set on
fire.
Less than a week later, Gray and accomplice Ray Dandridge, 39, killed Ashley
Baskerville, 21, who had been a lookout when Gray killed the Harveys;
Baskerville's mother, Mary Tucker, 47; and stepfather, Percyell Tucker, 55, in
their Richmond home.
O'Shea, in her closing argument, told the judge that what Gray did was a
nightmare for the community, the Harvey family and the 2 little girls.
Lisa Fried, 1 of Gray's lawyers, asked the judge not to call off the execution,
but to delay it so Gray's concerns can be fully aired.
In response to a question from Hudson, Fried conceded the Constitution does not
require a pain-free execution. But she said that while the public has an
interest in seeing that sentences are carried out, everyone in the state has an
interest in making sure executions are carried out constitutionally.
An expert, pharmacist Larry Sasich, testified that the testing performed by the
state on the compounded drugs - to identify them and ascertain their potency -
was inadequate. They should also been tested for sterility, acidity, and to see
if there are any particulates in the solutions, which are injected into the
inmate via an intravenous line.
Asked by Fried how likely it was that the use of a compounded drug would lead
to pain and suffering, Sasich said, "It is more likely compared to the use of
an FDA-approved product."
However, a state expert pharmacist, Daniel Buffington, said the compounding of
such drugs by pharmacies is common in the industry. "It's done routinely," he
said.
Buffington said he was not aware of any botched execution caused by midazolam.
He said the problems that he was aware of were caused by the drug's
administration.
Dr. Jonathan Groner testified there was less risk of pain in an execution by
firing squad, which would be almost instantaneous if done properly, than in one
using midazolam. Virginia has not used the firing squad, although Utah has
twice since the death penalty was allowed to resume in 1976.
A Department of Corrections official testified that no employees were trained
to conduct a firing squad, there was no facility in which to do so, and the
General Assembly would have to change the law to permit that form of execution.
He conceded under cross-examination that prison employees are trained in the
use of firearms.
(source: The Roanoke Times)
FLORIDA:
Judiciary Committee To Consider Death Penalty
Preparing for the annual legislative session, the House Judiciary Committee
next week will start weighing 2 high-profile issues: the death penalty and
workers' compensation insurance.
The committee next Tuesday will discuss court rulings on a series of issues,
including the death-penalty sentencing system and the workers' compensation
system, according to a meeting notice posted online.
Capital punishment has been on hold for the past year in the state because of
rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court.
(source: WUSF news)
****************
Florida: 1 of 5 states still executing people in 2016
In 2016, only 5 states in America continued to execute people. Florida was 1 of
them. And now the United State Supreme Court said that was wrong.
That means you live in a state that has more in common with Saudi Arabia and
Iran than with Minnesota or Wisconsin when it comes to capital punishment.
There are plenty of reasons governments don't use the same justice system today
that they used back when doctors used lobotomies to treat mental illness.
For one thing, the wrong people are sometimes sentenced to die. In the United
States, more than 150 people sentenced to death have later had their
convictions overturned in the past 4 decades. Florida leads the country with
26.
For another, the death penalty isn't equally applied. The mentally ill are more
likely to be sentenced to death. So are men. And blacks. And the poor.
People have also come to realize the death penalty doesn't even deter murder.
Murder rates are actually 25 % higher in states that have the death penalty,
according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Many people don't believe there's even a correlation. People murder other
people because they're enraged. Or nuts. Or evil. Or indifferent to human life.
Not because they first study sentencing options.
For all these reasons, the vast majority of states have stopped executing
people. 19 states have actively banned capital punishment. Most of the rest
have ceased in practice.
But in Florida, the politicians are still eager to kill. Especially Attorney
General Pam Bondi and Republicans in the Legislature.
Only now they have a problem. The Florida Supreme Court has told them that
Florida's death-penalty system is fatally flawed.
The biggest problem is that Florida is 1 of the only states in America that
doesn't require unanimous verdicts.
In other words, unlike almost everywhere else in America, juries in Florida
didn't have to be certain someone deserved to die ... just mostly sure. The
Supreme Court said that's unconstitutional.
No wonder we get it wrong so often.
Yet Florida politicians just want to get back to executing people as quickly as
possible.
In fact, the only time I've ever seen Bondi express concerns about an execution
was in 2013 when she learned one was scheduled the same night she wanted to
hold a campaign fundraiser.
She asked to halt the lethal injection ... just long enough for her to collect
and cash the checks. Then the killing was back on.
In some places, that would be a scandal. In Florida, it was just a Tuesday.
After Bondi was caught, she apologized ... and was then re-elected.
So what needs to happen now?
Well, much of the world would argue that Florida should stop ordering
executions, particularly because this state so often gets it wrong. Instead, we
should start sentencing murdering scumbags to life in prison where they can rot
in cells, costing taxpayers far less money than the high-cost trials and
endless appeals involved in capital cases.
But assuming legislators still plan on executing people (along with places like
Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Yemen and Libya) legislators should pass
sweeping reforms to make sure they get it right. The suggestions are already
there.
In 2010 - after Florida made headlines for its record number of wrongful
convictions - the state formed a commission to find ways to prevent future
errors. The group recommended many solid changes, including standardized ways
to conduct unbiased suspect lineups and cracking down on testimony from
jailhouse snitches who are prone to lie in exchange for sentence reductions.
Legislators ignored virtually all of those recommendations.
They remained eager to kill ... less eager to make sure they were killing the
right people.
That is inexcusable. If politicians in this state are intent on resuming
executions, they need to do everything the courts have said they must to make
it constitutional, including requiring unanimous verdicts - and also do
everything in their own power to make sure they're getting it right.
Maybe the citizens of Sudan and Iraq don't expect proper justice. But most
citizens in this country sure do.
You can contact your legislator at www.leg.state.fl.us.
(source: Scott Maxwell, Orlando Sentinel)
ALABAMA:
State lawmakers take aim at judicial override
2 Alabama Congressmen - 1 a Republican senator, the other a Democratic member
of the House of Representatives - have both pre-filed bills in the state
legislature to remove a judge's ability to impose a death penalty in a capital
case when the jury has recommended life imprisonment. Alabama is the last state
in the nation to allow this practice after the Delaware Supreme Court outlawed
judicial override in capital cases in August.
Sen. Dick Brewbaker, R-Montgomery, has filed a bill that "would prohibit a
court from overriding a verdict by a jury in a capital case," while
Representative Terry England, D-Tuscaloosa, filed House Bill 32 to "require a
verdict of death to be based on a unanimous vote of the jury and would prohibit
a court from overriding a verdict by a jury in a capital case."
Neither congressman responded to requests for comment on their bills.
The issue of judicial override in capital cases has flared up several times in
Alabama courts over the last year. In March, Jefferson County Circuit Court
Judge Tracie Todd issued a judicial order declaring that is unconstitutional
for Alabama to allow judicial override. While Todd's order contained many
criticisms of Alabama's sentencing system - including allegations that the
election of judges incentivizes unnecessarily "tough on crime" approaches to
win votes and that judges award public defense appointments based on previous
campaign contributions - a large part of her order rested on the ability of
Alabama judges to impose death sentences when the jury has ruled for life
imprisonment.
"The practice of overriding a jury's advisory verdict of life without the
possibility of parole for the imposition of capital punishment in Alabama has
become questionably prevalent and suspiciously routine," Todd wrote. She noted
that Alabama judges have overridden jury sentences of life to impose the death
penalty 97 times since 1976, the year the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated capital
punishment. In June, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals ordered Todd to
vacate her ruling, upholding judicial override in death penalty cases.
In her order, Todd also found that "Jefferson County leads the state in total
death sentences resulting from judicial overrides," with 17 such sentences
between 1976 and 2011. A report released in October by Harvard Law School's
Fair Punishment Project made similar criticisms of how capital cases are
resolved in Jefferson County. The project found that since 2006, Jefferson
County trial judges overruled jury recommendations of life imprisonment and
imposed capital punishment in 44 percent of capital case verdicts.
Todd's order noted that there are more judicial overrides to impose the death
penalty during years when judges are running for office. Randall Marshall,
acting executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama,
echoed this claim in explaining the ACLU's opposition to judicial override.
"Alabama is now the only state where judges are even permitted to override jury
verdicts of life to impose the death penalty. Because judges in Alabama are
elected, their decisions on such cases are politicized," he wrote in an email
to Weld.
Last January, in Hurst v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down
Florida';s capital punishment procedures, which had allowed judicial override.
The court found that Florida law allowed judges to find facts necessary for the
imposition of a death sentence in hearings separate from the jury trial, in
violation of the Sixth Amendment's requirement that a jury find each fact
necessary to impose the death penalty. In March, the Florida legislature
completely abolished judicial override in capital cases.
Shortly after the Hurst decision, the Alabama Supreme Court took up the appeal
of Jerry Bohannon, who had been found guilty of a 2010 murder. Bohannon's
defense argued that the Hurst precedent meant Alabama should not be able to
allow judicial override. On September 30, the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the
state's capital sentencing procedure. The high court ruled that unlike previous
Florida law, Alabama did require the jury to find the existence of an
aggravating factor before a death penalty can be imposed, making Alabama's
sentencing scheme constitutional.
However, there are signs that the U.S. Supreme Court itself is split on the
issue. On December 8, Justice Clarence Thomas issued a temporary stay on the
execution of Ronald Smith, an Alabama inmate who had been sentenced to death
over the recommendation of the jury after being found guilty of fatally
shooting a store clerk in 1994. Smith was executed later that night after the
justices evenly split on whether to stay the execution.
4 members of the court, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia
Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan argued in favor of a stay, but could not persuade a
5th justice to join them, which would have delayed the execution so that the
court could hear Smith's case. None of them gave reasons for supporting a stay.
Their willingness to stay hints, experts say, that the justices might have been
interested in considering Smith's defense argument, which had hinged on the
constitutionality of Alabama's judicial override scheme.
Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange has publicly defended judicial override
in the past. After Todd released her judicial order, Strange filed a petition
with the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, asking them to order her to vacate
her ruling. After the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the state's death penalty
laws in Bohannon's case, the Attorney General's Office sent out a statement
that said Strange "lauded" the finding that Alabama's capital punishment
procedure is constitutional and "an important victory for victims and for
criminal justice."
Mike Lewis, Strange's communications director, wrote in an email that "the
Attorney General's Office has no direct comment about the 2 pre-filed bills
concerning judicial override authority in death penalty sentencing. The Alabama
Supreme Court has held that the State's current death penalty sentencing law is
constitutional. If the Legislature decides to change the law, this office will
defend that law as constitutional as well," he added.
Even if Brewbaker and England's bills do not pass, however, Alabama's allowance
of judicial override in capital cases will almost certainly be challenged in
court.
"We are hopeful that the Alabama judges understand the importance of this
restriction and will be in favor of it passing," Marshall wrote. But, he added,
even in "the absence of action by the Alabama Legislature, we believe that more
challenges to the constitutionality of judicial override are inevitable."
(source: weldbham.com)
OHIO:
Challenge to Ohio's Newest Execution Method Goes to Trial
Ohio's newest execution method is either a legal approach to putting condemned
killers to death or a process akin to burning inmates at the stake, according
to arguments in the latest challenge to capital punishment in the state.
A 4-day trial that began Tuesday in federal court in Dayton focuses on Ohio's
updated execution system and a new 3-drug method similar to one used several
years ago.
Executions have been on hold in Ohio since January 2014, when death row inmate
Dennis McGuire gasped and snorted during the 26 minutes it took him to die.
The state plans to execute Ronald Phillips on Feb. 15 for the rape and death of
his girlfriend's 3-year-old daughter in Akron in 1993.
Witnesses before Magistrate Judge Michael Merz will include members of the
state execution team, who will not be named and will answer questions while
sitting behind courtroom screens.
Lawyers for death row inmates say a 3-drug method, announced last year, is
worse than a similar procedure used years ago. They say multiple problems
remain with the way the state prepares and carries out executions.
In a court filing, the attorneys say the 1st drug in the process - midazolam -
is unlikely to relieve an inmate's pain. The drug, which is meant to sedate
inmates, was used in executions in Arizona and Ohio in 2014 that turned out to
be problematic. But last year, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of
midazolam in a case out of Oklahoma.
According to the filing, because midazolam is not a barbiturate and cannot
relieve pain, inmates are likely to experience "severe physical pain," mental
suffering and anguish. As a result, "such an execution would be inhuman and
barbarous, akin in its level of pain and suffering to being buried alive,
burning at the stake, and other primitive methods long since abandoned by
civilized society," the filing last fall said.
The state used a 2-drug method with McGuire, beginning with midazolam, but then
discontinued it. Afterward, Ohio struggled to find new supplies of drugs since
they were placed off limits for executions by drugmakers.
The prisons agency now says it will use midazolam; rocuronium bromide, which
causes paralysis; and potassium chloride, which stops the heart. But the state
hasn't said where it got the drugs.
The state says the method is similar to Ohio's past execution process, which
all survived court challenges. State attorneys also say the U.S. Supreme Court
ruling last year makes clear that the use of midazolam is allowable.
"The Eighth Amendment does not prevent Ohio from adopting a new method of
execution, or returning to a previously used one, particularly when changes in
the availability of drugs necessitate such a change," state attorneys said in a
filing last fall.
(source: Associated Press)
*********************
Butler County prosecutor likely to seek death penalty in homicides
Butler County Prosecutor Michael Gmoser said the death penalty likely will be
sought for at least 1 of 3 men charged in 2 November Middletown homicides.
Charles Ray Graham, 27, of 2002 Pearl St., Doug Best, 28, of 402 Richmond St.,
and Derrick Brown, 22, of 815 Crawford St., are charged with 2 counts of
aggravated murder, 1 count of aggravated arson and 1 count of kidnapping in
deaths of Tiffany Hoskins, 36, and Joseph Romano, 47, both of Middletown.
"If the allegations are true, these defendants are evil, and there is evidence
in at least one case will be considered for the death-penalty specification,"
Gmoser said.
He declined to name the defendant for which the death penalty could apply.
The death specification must be considered by a grand jury that will hear
evidence to determine probable cause against defendants.
The men were arrested on Dec. 22 and the case was bound over to a grand jury
for consideration following a preliminary hearing on Dec. 29. in Middletown
Municipal Court. They men are being held without bond in the Butler County
Jail.
Middletown Detective Steve Winters testified during the preliminary hearing
that 4 shots were fired at Romano on Nov. 4, 3 of them striking him in the
chest, leg and neck. He said Romano was killed in his kitchen at 1517 Lafayette
Ave., and Hoskins was found shot inside a home at 1507 Jacoby Ave. a day later.
In the early morning on Nov. 5, Middletown firefighters were called to the
Jacoby residence and found flames shooting from the 2nd floor. They found
Hoskins' body at the top of the home's stairway.
She was identified, Winters said, by the number on her pacemaker that was
implanted years ago in a Dayton hospital and her tattoos that were matched from
a previous arrest. During last week's arraignment, police said Hoskins was
raped, shot in the back of the head, doused with bleach and gasoline, and lit
on fire in hopes of covering the crimes.
Winters said police believe the same gun was used to kill Romano and Hoskins,
though they have been unable to locate the weapon allegedly used.
Middletown Police Lt. Jimmy Cunningham encouraged anyone with information to
call Middletown police.
(source: Journal-News)
CALIFORNIA:
OC DA ousted from death penalty phase of county's worst mass killer
The state Attorney General's Office will apparently be prosecuting the death
penalty phase of the trial of the worst mass killer in Orange County history,
meaning the Orange County district attorney's office will be on the sidelines.
The AG's office announced Tuesday it will not seek an appeal to the California
Supreme Court of a ruling removing the Orange County District Attorney's Office
from further prosecution of Scott Evans Dekraai, the worst mass killer in the
county's history.
A panel of Fourth District Court of Appeal justices in November affirmed a
lower-court judge's recusal of the District Attorney's Office from prosecuting
Dekraai, who has pleaded guilty for the Seal Beach beauty salon massacre that
killed 8 and nearly 9 victims, in the death penalty phase of the defendant's
trial.
Kristin Ford, a spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office, confirmed there
would be no appeal to the state's high court, but did not say whether a
decision was made to seek the death penalty for Dekraai or let him be
automatically sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The 3-justice panel of the Fourth District Court of Appeal backed Orange County
Superior Court Judge Thomas Goethals, who found that the District Attorney's
Office could not ensure that Dekraai received a fair shake in the penalty phase
of his trial because of loyalty to the Orange County Sheriff's Department,
which Goethals mainly faulted for issues with the handling of jailhouse
informants.
Dekraai pleaded guilty to the murders of 8 people in and around a Seal Beach
beauty salon 5 years ago.
The state Attorney General's Office appealed Goethals' ruling, arguing that the
Sheriff's Department was to blame for the misconduct related to the handling of
informants in the case against Dekraai and others and that local prosecutors
did not have a conflict of interest.
"The sole issue is whether the trial court erred by recusing the entire OCDA's
office from prosecuting Dekraai's penalty phase," the appellate justices'
opinion states. "...we conclude it was well within the court's discretion to
recuse the entire OCDA's office from prosecuting the penalty phase because the
OCDA had a disqualifying conflict of interest."
Dekraai's attorney, Scott Sanders, has argued that Dekraai's constitutional
rights were violated in the way informants were used to glean damning evidence
against his client. Prosecutors have denied the claims.
While Goethals concluded in 2014 that the conduct did not rise to the level
needed to toss the District Attorney's Office from the case, the surfacing of
so-called TRED records on inmate movements changed his mind. He noted in his
ruling that 2 sheriff's deputies "either intentionally lied or willfully
withheld material evidence" from him.
The appellate panel concurred, writing, "Based on the entire record, we
conclude substantial evidence supported the trial court's conclusion OCDA had
an actual conflict because its loyalty to OCSD prevented the OCDA from
performing its constitutional and statutory obligations in this case."
The justices, like Goethals, singled out 2 deputies, Seth Tunstall and Ben
Garcia, for their conflicting statements on the handling of informants.
"Needless to say, there was overwhelming evidence supporting the trial court's
conclusion Garcia and Tunstall intentionally lied or willfully withheld
information at the 1st hearing and they lacked credibility," the justices
wrote.
Goethals was right to recuse Rackauckas' office because case law allows for it
when there are "institutional" problems between law enforcement agents, the
court concluded.
"Here, institutional interests and structural incentives between the OCDA and
OCSD constituted a genuine conflict of interest," the justices wrote.
"In Orange County, the OCSD is charged with investigating crimes, and the OCDA
is charged with prosecuting those crimes. In this case, though, the evidence
demonstrates the OCSD, in its secondary capacity as county jailer, created and
maintained a CI program whereby it continued to investigate criminal activity
in contravention of targeted defendants' constitutional rights."
The justices ruled there are "systemic problems" in the use of informants in
Orange County.
"The magnitude of the systemic problems cannot be overlooked," the justices
wrote.
(source: mynewsla.com)
WASHINGTON:
Abolish the death penalty
Gov. Jay Inslee's decision to halt the execution of Clark Elmore, while
unpopular, is right.
By way of disclaimer, I am a law-and-order guy. I grew up in a law-enforcement
family and am a former criminal prosecutor for King County. But the death
penalty is not just.
The death penalty is a complicated topic. Personally, my moral beliefs conflict
with what I know justice requires.
Allow me to explain. I believe there are crimes for which a convicted person
has forfeited his or her right to life. Clark Elmore, who murdered a
14-year-old girl in Bellingham in 1995, is a good example. However, justice
requires that we move to abolish the death penalty.
"In death penalty cases we sensationalize the defendant rather than remember
the victim."
I have spent considerable time studying the death penalty. As a deputy
prosecutor for the state of Washington I have prosecuted some of society's
worst criminals, including those who perpetrated sex crimes against children.
Also, at the Center for Justice in Chicago, I have defended individuals charged
with the death penalty.
In short, I have been in the trenches and seen the administration and effects
of the death penalty on both sides of the aisle. There are 3 reasons the death
penalty does not work.
First, the penalty has not and cannot be administered fairly. Despite court and
legislative efforts, it is applied arbitrarily. Death is often sought in
counties that have the resources to sustain a capital prosecution. If you
commit your crime in one county versus another, you're more likely or less
likely to get charged with death regardless of the crime. 2 % of all counties
in the United States account for the majority of capital prosecutions and
executions.
Racial bias is inherent in the administration of the death penalty and
minorities are charged more often than whites even when the same crime is
committed. In the prosecution of a capital case, it is the only crime for which
we talk about punishment during jury selection and before the trial even
begins. We simply cannot have a permanent punishment with an imperfect system
of justice. Even the most perfect criminal prosecution is filled with human
error.
Second, the death penalty is not effective. It is not and has never been a
deterrent. This overwhelming consensus has been well documented, including in
the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. There is no legitimate research
that substantiates the view that the death penalty saves lives, because it does
not.
Finally, the administration of the death penalty costs significantly more than
convicting and sentencing someone to life in prison without the possibility of
release. On average, it costs $3 million to prosecute the death penalty. In the
last three death-penalty prosecutions in King County, it cost taxpayers more
than $15 million in defense costs, not including the cost of prosecution.
We are outliers, alone among Western civilized nations that still administer
the death penalty.
In death penalty cases we sensationalize the defendant rather than remember the
victim. The Elmore case is a perfect example. Here we are as a society still
talking about Clark Elmore, remembering his name more than 20 years after he
committed the heinous crime against a young girl rather than sending him away
to be forgotten forever. Her name was Kristy Lynn Ohnstad.
As a policymaker, the governor is not afforded the luxury of making decisions
on an individual basis. The executive must make and administer policies that
can be applied across society as evenly and as consistently as possible. The
death penalty cannot be administered fairly, and it does not work. Let's end
the debate and abolish it.
(source: Opinion; Jason Rittereiser is a Seattle-based attorney. A former
criminal deputy prosecutor for King County, he now practices employment
litigation at HKM Employment Attorneys----Seattle Times
USA:
Judge keeps Fell death-penalty trial in Rutland
A federal judge says Donald Fell's upcoming death-penalty trial will be heard
in Rutland despite requests by the man's defense team to move the case due to
pretrial publicity.
U.S. District Court Judge Geoffrey Crawford ruled Tuesday that publicity was
not severe enough to affect Fell's ability to receive a fair trial. Fell, 36,
is facing a 2nd death-penalty trial in a case that stems from the killing of
North Clarendon grandmother Terri King, 53, in 2000.
Crawford wrote in his opinion that studies commissioned by defense lawyers
showed that a majority of people surveyed in Vermont said they either did not
know about the Fell case, or had no opinion on whether Fell is guilty. Jurors
will be selected from the entire state, the judge added.
"The court concludes there is insufficient evidence of actual prejudice to
support a transfer of venue," Crawford wrote. "While many people are likely to
be excused at jury selection for many reasons, including fixed views about the
case, it is reasonable to expect that hundreds will remain from whom a fair and
impartial jury can be selected."
Crawford also ruled that the proximity of the courthouse to the crime scene
will not necessarily mean a repeat of the juror misconduct that prompted the
overturning of Fell's conviction in 2014. One juror visited the crime scenes
connected to the case during the 1st trial in 2005. Trial rules strictly
prohibit jurors from considering any evidence other than what is presented in
court.
"The court concludes that conducting the trial in Rutland will permit organized
and judicially-sanctioned visits to the sites in question," Crawford wrote in
his 7-page opinion. "Coupled with appropriate instructions, a repeat of the
previous juror misconduct is unlikely."
Fell is accused of kidnapping and killing King in 2000 while he and an
accomplice were fleeing the double slaying on Fell's mother and a friend of
hers. Fell has pleaded not guilty. The accomplice died in prison before trial.
Fell is jailed pending trial at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn,
New York. Fell's trial is scheduled to begin in February.
(source: burlingtonfreepress.com)
****************
Sampson facing death sentence for Massachusetts murders linked to 2001 Meredith
homicide
For the 2nd time, a federal jury will be asked to decide if a drifter who
carjacked and killed 2 Massachusetts men should be put to death for the
weeklong crime rampage in 2001.
Gary Lee Sampson received a separate life sentence for killing Robert Whitney
in the same crime spree in New Hampshire.
Sampson fled to Vermont and attacked another man before giving up to police.
Sampson was condemned to die in 2003, but that decision was later overturned. A
new jury will hear closing arguments Wednesday in Sampson's sentencing retrial.
Sampson pleaded guilty in the 2001 killings of 19-year-old Jonathan Rizzo and
69-year-old Philip McCloskey. He is charged under federal law, which allows
prosecutors to seek the death penalty when a murder is committed during a
carjacking.
Sampson's lawyer says Sampson has suffered from brain damage since age 4.
Prosecutors portrayed Sampson as a manipulative career criminal.
(source: Associated Press)
*********************
Any Dylann Roof execution would be years away
If Charleston church killer Dylann Roof is sentenced to death by the federal
jury hearing his case, appeals will delay his execution for years.
"Generally speaking, you are looking at a decade or more," said Robert Dunham,
executive director of the Death Penalty Information Resource Center, a
nonprofit that tracks death penalty data.
Roof, 22, an avowed white supremacist, was convicted Dec. 15 of killing 9
African-Americans at downtown Charleston's Emanuel AME Church.
The penalty phase of his trial will start Wednesday. The 12 jurors who
convicted Roof will decide if he gets death or life without parole in prison.
Appeals are only part of the reason why any death sentence would be delayed.
Across the country, for various reasons, the death penalty is dying off.
According to a study published last month by Dunham's group, a record low
number of death penalty sentences were handed out last year - 30 across the
nation. That continues a sharply downward trend from 1996, when 315 death
penalty sentences were meted out.
Other national trends:
Only 20 executions took place in 2016, the lowest number in 25 years.
Public opinion polls show that support of capital punishment is at a 40-year
low. For example, the Pew Research Center found 49 % of Americans favor the
death penalty. Meanwhile, Gallup reported 60 % support the death penalty. But
that percentage is the lowest since the 1970s.
For the 1st time in 40 years, no state imposed more than 9 death sentences.
Just 2 states - Texas and Georgia - accounted for 80 % of last year's
executions.
DNA, anti-death lawyers among reasons for decline
Among the reasons for the slowdown: publicity over botched executions, multiple
examples of DNA exonerating people on death row and a national cadre of
anti-death penalty lawyers who fight every death sentence.
Also, more and more prominent people are questioning the death penalty,
including U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer. In a recent
dissent, Breyer said the death penalty may be unconstitutional for a host of
reasons, including the likelihood that innocents have been executed and
distortions in the jury selection process.
If sentenced to die, Roof would be sent to a federal maximum security facility
in Terre Haute, Ind., where he would join 62 other federal prisoners on death
row. One of his fellow death row inmates would be Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston
Marathon bomber.
Executions are rare in the federal system.
In 2004, Jack Swerling, a Columbia defense lawyer, represented Brandan Basham,
the last man sentenced to death in a federal death penalty trial in South
Carolina. Basham was convicted in the 2002 kidnapping and murder of an S.C.
woman. He remains on death row, 12 years after his sentencing.
Swerling, who has defended clients in numerous death penalty trials, is not
surprised. "The appeals process can take 12 or 14 years," he said.
Since the federal death penalty law was enacted in 1988, only 3 people have
been executed.
Those 3 are Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber; Juan Raul Garza, a
marijuana grower who killed 3 other drug traffickers; and Louis Jones Jr., a
Gulf War veteran who kidnapped and killed a female soldier.
Jones' execution in 2003 was the last time a federal death row prisoner was
executed. That was 13 years ago.
S.C. has slowed executions, too
Roof also will face a death penalty trial in South Carolina's state courts.
Ninth Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson plans to seek Roof's execution on state
murder charges. No date has been announced for that trial, but it could be held
later this year.
Still, if Roof is sentenced to death by a state jury, it will be years before
he is executed, due to appeals.
South Carolina also has seen a sharp decline in the death sentences and
executions.
No convicted killer was sentenced to death by an S.C. jury in 2016, said
Lindsey Vann, a staff attorney with Justice 360, a Columbia-based nonprofit
that seeks fairness in the state's capital cases.
"We have only seen people leaving death row this year because of (appellate
court) reversals," Vann said, adding no one has been sent to the state's death
row since 2014.
Souith Carolina's last execution took place in 2011. There are about 40 inmates
on the state's death row, including 4 who have been there since the 1980s. All
of their cases are in various stages of appeal.
Part of the decline in execution is due to the public's realization that death
penalty cases, with their long trials and multiple appeals, are expensive, Vann
said. Also, many juries are finding that the alternative to a death sentence -
life without parole - is a reasonable option, Vann said.
Even if an S.C. inmate's execution date were to come due, the state Department
of Corrections would be unable to carry it out, says corrections director Bryan
Stirling.
Under state law, an inmate must be executed by lethal injection unless he or
she chooses the electric chair.
For now, lethal injections aren't possible.
That's because expiration dates already have passed on the toxic drugs the
department uses in executions.
By far, inmates' preferred way to be put to death is by injection, and the
state can't force an inmate to choose the electric chair. And, for now, drug
companies are refusing to sell the drugs needed for an execution to South
Carolina, as has happened in other states.
Stirling attributes the drug companies' refusals to fear of bad publicity from
anti-death penalty groups.
However, since no execution dates have been set in South Carolina, no
executions have been delayed for lack of the drugs, he said.
"We are still trying to obtain the drugs to carry out executions as required by
law," Stirling said. "But, thus far, (we) have been unable to."
(source: greenvilleonline.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
