[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS

Sat Jan 6 16:47:07 UTC 2007

URGENT ACTION APPEAL

05 January 2007
UA 07/07    Death penalty / Legal concern

USA (Texas)
Johnathan Bryant Moore (m), white, aged 32

Johnathan Moore is scheduled to be executed on 17
January 2007 in Texas.  He was sentenced to death in
November 1996 for the murder of a police officer in
San Antonio in January 1995.

San Antonio police officer Fabian Dominguez, aged 29,
was shot dead in the early hours of 15 January 1995
outside a house where a burglary was in progress. Two
days later, after a high-speed car chase, 20-year-old
Johnathan Moore was arrested. He told police that he
and two others had burgled the house in question and
were about to drive away when their way was blocked by
Officer Dominguez. Moore said that he shot the officer
after the latter pointed his gun through the car
window.

At the trial, Johnathan Moore pleaded not guilty by
reason of insanity, a very difficult plea on which to
prevail. The defence lawyers argued that, as a result
of the defendant's mental illness, the symptoms of
which had for some time included paranoid delusions
that authority figures, particularly the police, were
trying to kill him, Johnathan Moore had not realized
his conduct was wrong at the time of the crime and had
feared that Officer Dominguez was going to shoot him.

The court-appointed lawyers suspected that Moore might
be incompetent to stand trial - that is, unable to
assist them or have a rational understanding of the
proceedings. The judge appointed a mental health
expert, Dr Michael Arambula, to examine him. Dr
Arambula and his colleague Dr Margot Zuelzer concluded
that Moore was suffering from schizoaffective
disorder, a serious mental illness combining symptoms
of schizophrenia such as delusions or hallucinations
with a mood disorder such as depression. They were not
asked to report to the court on the question of
Moore's competence to stand trial. They warned the
defense lawyers that, while Moore might currently be
competent to stand trial, his mental health could
deteriorate into incompetence under the stress of a
trial, particularly if he incorporated his lawyers
into his delusional thinking. The trial began five
months later.

Under Texas law, if evidence is brought to the
attention of the trial judge raising a bona fide doubt
about the defendant's competence to stand trial, the
judge must suspend the proceedings and empanel a new
jury to decide the issue. Although there were
indications of Moore's mental health deteriorating
during the trial - he became variously withdrawn or
disruptive, and sought to represent himself - the
lawyers did not ask for a competency hearing.
According to a 2005 appeal brief, by the time of the
trial, Moore had begun ''to suspect that his own
lawyers were part of the larger conspiracy to kill
him, and eventually refused to cooperate with them at
all. By the time of jury selection, he had effectively
withdrawn his attention from the proceedings
altogether, and spent most of his time in the
courtroom leafing idly through books and magazines''.
At a post-conviction hearing, the lawyers would recall
that they had suspected that Moore was mentally ill
from the time they first met him and that it had
become increasingly difficult during the trial to
communicate with him. Outbursts by Moore during the
trial included his interrupting of witnesses. For
example, when one witness was asked whether they had
seen the post-arrest photographs of Moore, Moore
intervened: ''Does Jesus Christ have a long hair and a
beard? You've seen pictures of Him. What makes the
difference between Jesus Christ and Charles Manson?''
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals would later
dismiss claims that such outbursts were evidence of
the need for a competency hearing, stating that they
were ''timely, topical, and logically related to the
questions and answers offered during the examination
of other witnesses''.

The defense presented Drs Arambula and Zuelzer, who
testified that in their opinion Moore had been
suffering from serious mental illness at the time of
the crime and that he had been legally insane as a
result. The defense also presented lay witnesses,
detailing Moore's difficult family life, his
commitment to a mental hospital and treatment with
psychotropic medication during his adolescence, and
his increasing paranoia as a young adult. In rebuttal,
the prosecution presented two doctors who testified
that in their opinion Johnathan Moore did not suffer
from a serious mental illness and was legally sane at
the time of the shooting. The jury rejected the
insanity defense and convicted Moore of capital
murder.

At the sentencing phase, Johnathan Moore again sought
to discharge his lawyers, and represented himself for
the first two days of proceedings.  The defense
lawyers sought a competency hearing, but without
recalling the mental health experts, who therefore
never testified at any stage on the question of
Moore's competence to stand trial. The judge rejected
the motion, the sentencing continued, and Johnathan
Moore was sentenced to death after the jury found that
he would pose a future risk to society if allowed to
live (a prerequisite for a death sentence in Texas).
Among the prosecutor's arguments for execution was
that the jury could consider Moore's youth as a reason
to hand down a death sentence.

Drs Arambula and Zuelzer later testified at an
evidentiary hearing during the appeals process.
Although they had had only limited opportunity to
observe Johnathan Moore during the trial, after
hearing the trial lawyers' testimony about his
conduct, Dr Zuelzer concluded that Moore had become
incompetent during the proceedings. According to a
2005 appeal brief, Dr Arambula testified that under a
situation in which ''Moore's paranoia and delusions
caused him to become so suspicious of his attorneys
that he refused to communicate with them, kept his
head down, flipped through magazines and books during
the trial, and eventually chose to represent himself,
he [Arambula] could have testified that Moore was
incompetent.'' The appeal courts have upheld the
conviction and death sentence, rejecting the claim,
among others, that the defense lawyers were
ineffective for having not presented their experts in
seeking a competency hearing.

Johnathan Moore's execution is scheduled to take place
on the 30th anniversary of the resumption of
executions in the USA.  The ''modern'' era of judicial
killing in the USA began on 17 January 1977 with the
execution of Gary Gilmore in Utah. There have now been
1,057 executions, of which 379 (36 per cent) have been
carried out in Texas. Texas has executed nearly four
times as many people as the next leading death penalty
state, Virginia. Although there is evidence of opinion
turning against the death penalty in the USA (see USA:
New Year's resolution: End a cruel and outdated
punishment, 21 December 2006,
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR512052006),the
rate of judicial killing in Texas remains high. In
2006, Texas carried out 24 executions, five times as
many as the next highest state total. Texas has
frequently flouted international standards in its
pursuit of the death penalty, including its use
against the mentally impaired, and against those
denied their right to adequate legal representation.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty
unconditionally in all cases. The organization has
raised concerns about the use of the death penalty
against people with mental illness, including in
Texas, and including people whose competence to stand
trial was in doubt (see USA: The execution of mentally
ill offenders, January 2006,
http://web.amnesty.org/library/pdf/AMR510032006ENGLISH/$File/AMR5100306.pdf).

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive as
quickly as possible (please include Johnathan Moore's
prisoner number, #999216, in your appeals):

- expressing sympathy for the family and friends of
San Antonio police officer Fabian Dominguez, and
explaining that you are not seeking to condone his
murder or to downplay the suffering caused;

- expressing concern that the trial of Johnathan Moore
went ahead without a competency hearing, despite
evidence that he was not competent to stand trial as a
result of mental illness;

- calling on the Governor to stop this execution and
seek a clemency recommendation from the Board of
Pardons and Paroles;

- urging the Governor to support a moratorium on
executions in Texas, with a view to abolition.

APPEALS TO:

Governor Rick Perry
Office of the Governor
PO Box 12428
Austin TX 78711-2428
Fax: 1 512 463 1849
Salutation: Dear Governor

Please send appeals immediately. Check with the AIUSA
Urgent Action office if sending appeals after 17
January 2007.

Amnesty International is a worldwide grassroots
movement that promotes and defends human rights.

This Urgent Action may be reposted if kept intact,
including contact information and stop action date (if
applicable). Thank you for your help with this appeal.

Urgent Action Network
Amnesty International USA
600 Pennsylvania Ave SE 5th fl
Washington DC 20003
Email: uan at aiusa.org
http://www.amnestyusa.org/urgent/
Phone: 202.544.0200
Fax: 202.675.8566

----------------------------------
END OF URGENT ACTION APPEAL
----------------------------------