[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., N.C., FLA., ALA., OHIO

[Rick Halperin]

June 30



PENNSYLVANIA:

Capital Punishment Is Hard to Abolish. Pennsylvania's Death Penalty Battle 
Shows Why.


The Republican-dominated Pennsylvania House recently voted in favor of a 
resolution condemning the death penalty moratorium enacted by Democratic 
Governor Tom Wolf in February, shortly after his historic win over Republican 
incumbent Tom Corbett. In a perfect example of how things sometimes go in 
Pennsylvania, the House Judiciary Committee, of which the resolution's prime 
sponsor is a member, held a hearing ostensibly to explore the issue - on the 
day after passing the resolution.

When he announced the moratorium, Wolf's office called the state's death 
penalty "a flawed system" that is "ineffective, unjust, and expensive." The 
moratorium's critics aren't arguing that death penalty is effective, just and 
cost-efficient in the state; regardless of moral perspective on the idea of 
government executions, it is a near universally acknowledged fact that the 
system for choosing who will be executed is broken. In 2013, Pennsylvania 
Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Saylor began a paper on the topic by stating 
what he called the obvious: "The current state of Pennsylvania's capital 
jurisprudence is impaired," he wrote. "Indeed, a colleague sometimes commented 
that, in Pennsylvania, we do not have the death penalty, rather, we have 'death 
by arteriolosclerosis.'"

What the resolution calls unconstitutional, though, is the relatively esoteric 
business of the protocol Wolf used to declare a temporary halt to the death 
penalty. Specifically, it is an argument over whether or not Article IV, 
Section 9 of the state constitution grants Wolf sufficient reprieve powers to 
justify his action.

House Resolution 143 urges Wolf to reverse the moratorium so Pennsylvania can 
to get back to executing inmates. Except, as Chief Justice Saylor noted, 
Pennsylvania generally doesn't execute inmates.

Pennsylvania has the 5th most populous death row in the nation, with 186 people 
theoretically awaiting lethal injection with drugs the state currently doesn't 
possess and can't obtain. Since Pennsylvania reinstated the death penalty in 
1978, only 3 men have been put to death, and they all went willingly, by 
voluntarily waiving appeals. 6 people have been exonerated. Since 1985, 29 have 
died of natural causes. There have been more than 250 reversals. According to 
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Pennsylvania is less likely to execute a death 
row inmate than any other state that has carried out any executions.

So far, Governor Wolf has granted reprieve to 2 inmates who were scheduled for 
execution. The guilt of neither inmate is in doubt, though the case of Terrance 
Williams is marred by serious questions about the relevance of the allegation 
that the murder victim had sexually abused his killer.

The moratorium isn't indefinite; Wolf says he is waiting for the opportunity to 
review and address a forthcoming report from the Pennsylvania Task Force and 
Advisory Commission on Capital Punishment. The task force, commissioned by the 
state Senate back in 2011, initially expected to deliver their report by the 
end of 2013 but they've repeatedly extended the deadline. (The Task Force hopes 
to issue their forthcoming report by the end of the year.)

Meanwhile, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams filed a lawsuit asking 
the Supreme Court to rule Wolf's moratorium a "lawless act." (It is fascinating 
and sad that the 1st black district attorney from Philadelphia is suing a 
wealthy white man from central Pennsylvania to re-instate a death penalty 
system that has been repeatedly found to discriminate, specifically, against 
poor black men from Philadelphia.)

Though the task force will surely provide insightful information, we don't need 
it to know the system is profoundly broken. Several reports in recent years 
have revealed that Pennsylvania's system for defending poor people facing the 
death penalty is so inadequate that it may be unconstitutional.

Pennsylvania is the only state in the country that does not fund indigent 
defense, leaving that problem to each of the state's 67 counties. 1/2 of all 
the state's death row inmates come from Philadelphia, which historically has 
low funding and high pursuit of the death penalty.

That's a bad combination made worse by the wheel of fortune spun when a poor 
person is arrested in Philadelphia. Since 1993, 1 in 5 indigent defendants have 
been represented by the Defender Association of Philadelphia, a non-profit 
organization under contract with the city. The other 4 of out 5 are assigned to 
a tiny pool of court-appointed lawyers. A 2011 study that analyzed the 
disparity in sentencing in Philadelphia raised questions about whether current 
commonly-used methods for providing indigent defense satisfy Sixth Amendment 
legal tests for effective counsel and Eighth Amendment prohibitions against 
arbitrariness in punishment.

The study found a significant difference in sentencing depending on 
representation. Compared to appointed counsel, Defenders Association counsel 
reduced their clients' murder conviction rate by 19 % and lowered the 
probability that their clients receive a life sentence by 62 %.Not one of its 
clients has received the death penalty during the years analyzed in the study.

Advocates say the problem of insufficient funding is exacerbated by a 
controversial flat fee system, which incentivizes the least amount of work for 
cases with the most at stake. Until 2012, court-appointed Philadelphia lawyers 
earned $1,333 if they resolved a case before trial, and a whopping $2,000 if 
the case went to trial. After the 1st day of trial, lawyers get $200 for 3 
hours or less of daily court time and $400 for more than 3 hours. For years - 
Philadelphia's previous district attorney was notoriously nicknamed the 
deadliest D.A. for aggressively seeking death sentences - these lawyers earned 
what would be the equivalent of $2 an hour, had they prepared the number of 
hours typical in federal capital trials. "Outrageous," observed the former 
director of the Southern Center for Human Rights, "even by southern standards." 
The number one reason for reversing convictions in Pennsylvania is ineffective 
counsel.

In 2011 a former public defender named Marc Bookman, who now runs the Atlantic 
Center for Capital Representation, an organization that provides training for 
capital defense teams in Pennsylvania, filed a petition contending the pay was 
so low that it globally violates the constitutional rights of indigent people 
to effective counsel. The petition was so unusual no one knew what to do with 
it, though what it articulated - a connection between Philadelphia's low pay, 
aggressive pursuit of the death penalty and high number of ineffective counsel 
reversals - was hardly surprising.

In response to Bookman's petition, the Supreme Court held one day of hearings 
before suspending them, then commissioned another report. Common Pleas Court 
Judge Benjamin Lerner concluded the system, among other things, was "grossly 
inadequate" and "unacceptably increases the risk of ineffective assistance of 
counsel." He also concluded there is no global fix, and that the 
constitutionality had to be determined on a case-by-case basis. That would 
entail, of course, decades more of the ridiculously lengthy appeals process 
that critics of the moratorium insist should be shortened, to make the death 
penalty more efficient - for prosecutors, anyway. The pay for appointed counsel 
was bumped up to a still-meager $10,000 flat fee.

Those who are worst off in Philadelphia are, as always, further stratified by 
race. A 1998 analysis of racial bias by law professor David Baldus and 
statistician George Woodworth revealed that black defendants facing capital 
punishment in Philadelphia have nearly quadruple the odds of receiving the 
death penalty as white defendants. In fact, the researchers found that being 
black in Philadelphia functioned as an "extra aggravating factor," increasing 
the odds of a defendant receiving a death sentence to the same degree as an 
aggravating circumstance of "torture" or "grave risk of death."

A fascinating exchange took place during the recent hearings about this issue 
when Robert Dunham of the Death Penalty Information Center cited this study in 
his testimony. After Dunham explained the Baldus study, Rep. Rick Saccone 
responded, "I don't get that, being black is not an aggravating circumstance."

"That's correct," said Dunham.

"So it doesn't apply to the death sentence," replied Saccone.

"It should not," said Dunham, explaining that was exactly his point. And so it 
went on, an unnervingly circuitous conversation about how the system should 
work versus how it does work until, exasperated, Saccone insisted that Dunham 
was taking "a very big leap of faith" by believing being black led to an 
increased chance of being put to death.

Listening to this conversation circle the drain against the backdrop of all the 
evidence that Pennsylvania's death penalty - without that all-important 
forthcoming report even out yet - is broken, it's hard not to conclude that the 
largest leap of faith is believing it's possible to fix Pennsylvania's capital 
punishment at all.

In 2012, a young man named Derrick White was sentenced to death in Philadelphia 
for killing a former local basketball star to prevent him from testifying in 
another trial. Initially, White's mother didn't want her son's killer to 
receive the death penalty because, she said, there was too much death in 
Philadelphia already. But she was at peace with the sentence. "Justice was 
served," she said, "and nobody wins."

Her statement is as profound as her pain is unfathomable. During the recent 
hearing in Pennsylvania, lawmakers repeatedly conflated execution with justice 
for victims' families. The resolution specifically cites the widow of Terrance 
Williams' victim, who wrote in response that she was "shocked and upset" that 
politicians were "using" her for political gain. A year after White's 
sentencing, the death penalty was reversed in part because of ineffective 
counsel.

In 1834, Pennsylvania led the nation in moving public death penalty hangings 
inside, out of public view. Capital punishment abolitionists opposed the 
change. They had hoped that Pennsylvanians would eventually call for an end to 
state executions - if only we could see what was really happening.

(source: New Republic)






VIRGINIA:

ACLU of Virginia comment on U.S. Supreme Court lethal injection case


The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Virginia released the following 
statement by Executive Director Claire Guthrie Gastanaga regarding the U.S. 
Supreme Court's decision in Glossip v. Gross regarding the use of the drug 
midazolam as part of a lethal injection protocol.

Yesterday's narrow decision was very fact specific and does not mean that 
others sentenced to death could not prevail on a similar claim in Virginia or 
elsewhere. The Court emphasized today that its decision was about "likelihood 
of success" at a preliminary stage of a case and not actual success after all 
the evidence is in. The Court was very deferential to the district court's 
finding of facts about the effects of the drug at the preliminary stage of the 
proceedings, findings that may not hold up after full discovery and trial. 
Moreover, the procedures used in Oklahoma and those authorized in Virginia are 
quite different, and no one in our correctional system should read this case as 
approving the way capital punishment is administered in the Commonwealth.

Regardless of the facts of this case or the drug involved, however, the 
important question we should be discussing is not how we execute people, but 
whether we should be doing so at all given the reality that our capital 
punishment system is neither fair nor accurate. An estimated 1 in every 25 
people on death row in the U.S. is innocent, and Virginia is not immune from 
the potential to execute an innocent person. As the American Bar Association 
found when it assessed Virginia's death penalty process, the Commonwealth's 
procedures are flawed from the law enforcement identification and interrogation 
process at the beginning to the post conviction process at the end. It is 
unconscionable that we are debating methods of execution when there is strong 
evidence that calls into question the basic fairness and accuracy of Virginia's 
death penalty process.

There is a growing consensus across the political spectrum that the death 
penalty is broken beyond repair, regardless of how we carry out executions or 
which drugs are used. The movement away from the death penalty is clear. A 
majority of states have abandoned the death penalty in law or in practice in 
recent years, including the traditionally "red" state of Nebraska, which just 
repealed the death penalty completely. Virginia should follow suit. Until 
repeal is accomplished, however, we urge Governor McAuliffe, the Secretary of 
Public Safety and members of the General Assembly to take all possible steps 
legislatively and administratively to ensure the current process is fair and 
accurate.

(source: Augusta Free Press)

****************

Local Reaction to Supreme Court Ruling on Lethal Injection


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that states that have the death penalty, 
including Virginia, can use a controversial drug to put inmates to death.

There are 2 men in Charlottesville that could potentially be facing the death 
penalty.

Jesse Matthew is facing capital murder charges in the death of Hannah Graham, 
and Gene Washington's charges were upped to capital murder earlier this month 
for the deaths of Robin and Mani Aldridge.

If those cases are tried here in Charlottesville, it could be a local jury 
deciding whether or not to put them to death, which means the way death 
penalties are carried out could soon hit close to home.

Charlottesville resident Morgan Jackson said, "I think there is a lot of grey 
area when it comes to life and death. I personally don't believe man should 
have the power over life and death."

Jackson added, "I think everybody has a chance to change and they deserve 
that."

However Jeremy Heer said, "It depends on the crime, right. One for one may not 
necessarily be the right ratio but yeah there are times that it's bad enough 
that I think that it's warranted. Absolutely."

A recent University of Mary Washington poll found that 65 percent of Virginia 
adults believe that the state should "keep" the death penalty.

In light of the controversy over lethal injection in Oklahoma, where the drug 
is alleged to have caused a painful death, the question of how to carry out the 
death penalty seems to be more of a debate.

Virginia added the controversial sedative to its protocol last year but hasn't 
used it. Still, many of those in favor of capital punishment don't want it to 
be cruel.

David Destefano said, "I suspect it's the best deterrent for capital murder and 
I say you should do it I guess in a way that's humane."

Destefano says the goal is not to torture people but it is to deter future 
crimes.

The state's last lethal injection execution was in August 2011, but there are 
currently 8 men on Virginia's death row.

(source: newsplex.com)






NORTH CAROLINA:

Justices allow new hearings in state capital cases


The Supreme Court has left in place lower court rulings ordering hearings over 
jurors in two North Carolina death penalty trials who reached beyond the jury 
room for biblical references to help their deliberations.

In one case, a juror called her father in search of a biblical verse to help 
her decide between life and death for defendant Jason Wayne Hurst, who was 
sentenced to death for the 2002 shooting death of an acquaintance in Asheboro, 
North Carolina. The father pointed her to a verse containing the phrase "an eye 
for an eye."

The appeals court ordered hearings to determine if jurors were improperly 
influenced.

(source: Associated Press)






FLORIDA:

Executions Back on Track after High Court Ruling


The US Supreme Court has ruled that the drug midazolam is acceptable for use in 
lethal injections. 4 Oklahoma convicts had challenged the drugs use, and 
Florida courts stopped executions here pending the outcome. As Mike Vasilinda 
tells us, the ruling is now likely to open the door to dozens of executions in 
Florida.

The High Court ruling is 127 pages long, but its essence can be found in the 
1st sentence. "Because Capital punishment is constitutional, there must be a 
constitutional means of carrying it out" wrote the majority.

The ruling is a set back for anti death penalty advocates in Florida. Sheila 
Meenan represents Citizens Against the Death Penalty and while disappointed, 
remains hopeful.

"I do't think there's going to be an end to the death penalty anytime soon, but 
I do believe and am extremely hopeful, and it won't be too long from now when 
the US Supreme Court is going to say that the death penalty is against the 
constitution" says Meehan.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote 1 of 2 blistering dissents.

"She really talked about how this drug, midazolam, could even be the equivalent 
of the chemical of burning at the stake. She used very strong language along 
those lines and as I say, 3 others concurred with her in that dissent" says 
Meehan.

Quadruple murderer Jerry Correll's execution was stopped in February. It could 
soon be back on. Jerry Correll's execution would set a record of 22 for 1 
governor in modern times. A list prepared by the Florida Supreme court 
identified more than 100 inmates who have exhausted their appeals. Meehan says 
the decision opens the door to multiple warrants.

"Now that this decision is out, there is really nothing to stop Governor Scott 
from signing lots of death warrants. We've got lots of people, more than 400 
people on Florida's death row" says Meehan.

The Florida Department of Corrections did not respond to requests for an 
interview

This afternoon's death row count was actually 396. And late this afternoon, 
Attorney General Pam Bondi asked the Florida Supreme Court to lift the Stay of 
Execution for Jerry Correll. Once lifted, the door is open for Governor Rick 
Scott to sign his and other death warrants.

(source: Florida News)

*******************

Lethal cocktail OK'd by court, Bondi seeks killer's execution


Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday asked the state Supreme Court to 
lift its stay of execution for a man who murdered 4 people - the same day the 
U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of a drug that's an ingredient in the state's 
lethal injections.

Bondi asked the high court to allow the execution of 59-year-old Jerry Correll 
to proceed. Correll had been scheduled to die for killing his ex-wife, daughter 
and 2 other people 30 years ago in Orlando.

But the state Supreme Court in February halted the execution pending the 
outcome of an Oklahoma case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

That case questioned whether the sedative midazolam can be used without 
violating the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual 
punishment.

The justices voted 5-4 that midazolam can be used, though 2 dissenting justices 
said for the 1st time that they think it's "highly likely" the death penalty 
itself is unconstitutional.

The drug was used in executions in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma that took longer 
than usual and raised concerns it did not perform its intended task of putting 
inmates into a coma-like sleep.

Bondi filed her request to lift the stay in light of Monday's decision.

Death penalty opponents used the Supreme Court's decision to press for an end 
to the state's death penalty, noting that 25 people once on Florida's death row 
have been exonerated through the years.

"No one knows how many more innocent people remain on death row or, God forbid, 
have already been executed," said Mark Elliott, executive director of 
Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. "More and more conservatives, 
libertarians, and progressives agree that the death penalty is broken beyond 
repair."

Florida uses a 3-drug cocktail of midazolam, vecuronium bromide and potassium 
chloride to knock out, paralyze and stop the heart of a prisoner.

In 2013, then-Corrections Secretary Mike Crews wrote to Gov. Rick Scott, saying 
he had reviewed the state's lethal injection procedure.

The regimen was "compatible with evolving standards of decency ... and advances 
in science, research, pharmacology, and technology," Crews wrote.

"The process will not involve unnecessary lingering or the unnecessary or 
wanton infliction of pain and suffering," Crews added. "The foremost objective 
of the lethal injection process is a humane and dignified death."

This January, Corrections Secretary Julie Jones also certified the process, 
using the same language.

"Our office respects the court's decision and will continue to follow the law," 
said John Tupps, Scott's spokesman. "The governor's foremost concern is for the 
victims of heinous crimes and their families."

Paul Howell, sentenced to death in the 1992 murder of Florida Highway Patrol 
trooper Jimmy Fulford, challenged the state's use of midazolam, saying he had 
medical conditions that would prevent the drug from working properly.

A circuit judge, ordered by the Florida Supreme Court to hold an evidentiary 
hearing, disagreed. Judge Angela Dempsey ruled that Howell hadn't proved 
midazolam "will fail to make him unconscious and insensate when the 2nd and 3rd 
drugs are administered," and handed the case back to the state's Supreme Court.

Howell was put to death last February.

Correll's attorney, Maria Perinetti of the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel 
in Tampa, was out of the office Monday.

In Monday's case, Justice Samuel Alito said for a conservative majority that 
arguments the drug could not be used effectively as a sedative in executions 
are speculative.

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, "Under the court's new rule, it would 
not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have 
petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned 
at the stake."

Alito responded by saying "the dissent's resort to this outlandish rhetoric 
reveals the weakness of its legal arguments."

In a separate dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer said the time has come for the 
court to debate whether the death penalty itself is constitutional. Justice 
Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Breyer's opinion.

(source: Tampa Bay Tribune)





********************

Florida divided on Supreme Court death penalty ruling----Court ruled drugs used 
in lethal injection constitutional


Even though the Supreme Court just ruled that the use of lethal injection in 
executions is legal, experts are saying the death penalty debate is far from 
over.

Monday, the justices voted 5-4 in a case from Oklahoma that the drug used is 
not cruel and unusual punishment.

Experts in the legal profession and the State Attorney Office said they are not 
surprised by the ruling, but some are saying the whole idea of the death 
penalty needs to have another look.

"We are very happy that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 
death penalty. Capital punishment is constitutional, and there is no dispute 
about that," Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda said.

But the 2 dissenting judges in the case are saying that more than likely, the 
death penalty itself may be unconstitutional. That statement is what some 
people have said will to lead to more debate in the future.

"There is an attack by some in terms of the death penalty. They cannot anymore. 
They try, in some cases, to say a person is innocent. But that is not the 
attack now. The attack now is on how it???s carried out, which is ridicules in 
this scenario. To me, the bottom line is if there is an issue, let's go back to 
firing squads. There would be one bullet, and it would be quick," de la Rionda 
said.

Former state attorney Harry Shorstein has prosecuted or overseen a number of 
death penalty cases, and he said that over time, his opinion on the matter has 
changed.

"My opinion has changed somewhat, because we have studied the death penalty 
from every angle imaginable. My conclusion today is the system is broken as it 
applies to the death penalty. There is no possible justification for having 
people on death row. I think the average is 13 years, but we have a case in 
Jacksonville that has been there for 40 years. That argumentatively is cruel 
and unusual punishment," Shorstein said.

Shorstein is talking about the case of Jacob Dougan (pictured at left), who was 
sentence to die 40 years ago for killing a man in Jacksonville and trying to 
start a race riot over it.

Shorestein said he's now working with a group in Washington that will be 
challenging death penalty cases.

Defense Attorney Richard Kuritiz said Florida will have a huge role in upcoming 
death penalty cases with the Supreme Court.

Florida is the only state where a person can be executed on the recommendation 
of a 7 to 5 justice ruling. Almost every other state requires a 12 to 0 
recommendation. So right now, pending in the U.S. Supreme Court is that 
particular issue. Is the Florida system of the death penalty constitutional, 
and I think there will be a real problem with that, and I think it will be 
stricken down here in Florida," Kuritiz said.

(source: news4jax.com)






ALABAMA:

Alabama death penalty litigation could continue


Alabama saw 1 legal obstacle to executions removed by the U.S. Supreme Court 
Monday. But litigation over capital punishment may not be over.

The high court ruled 5-4 that three Oklahoma inmates challenging the state's 
use of midazolam, a sedative in the lethal injection process, had failed to 
prove that it violated the U.S. Constitution's prohibitions against cruel and 
unusual punishment.

Writing for the 5-justice majority in the case, known as Glossip v. Gross, 
Justice Samuel Alito said that the inmates failed to show a likelihood that 
midazolam would not prevent the intense pain from the administration of 2 other 
drugs. Alito also wrote the inmates had to suggest a safer drug.

"When a method of execution is authorized under state law, a party contending 
that this method violates the Eighth Amendment bears the burden of showing that 
the method creates an unacceptable risk of pain," Alito wrote. "Here, 
petitioners' own experts effectively conceded that they lacked evidence to 
prove their case beyond dispute."

Midazolam, used in Alabama's execution process, aims to render a condemned 
inmate conscious before staff administers drugs that paralyze the muscles and 
stop the heart.

Alabama, like other states, used sodium thiopental as its sedative until 2011, 
when drug company Hospira stopped manufacturing it. The state switched to 
pentobarbital, but said early last year that its supply had run out. It 
switched to midazolam in September.

The drug was present at 3 botched executions around the country last year, 
though its role was unclear. Ohio executed a convicted murderer and rapist in 
January 2014; the execution took 26 minutes. A reporter saidthe condemned man 
gasped and choked throughout it. 5 months later, a convicted murderer gasped 
640 times and took 2 hours to die during his execution in Arizona.

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said asking inmates to propose a safer 
execution method was "wholly novel," and questioned the evidence used in 
midazolam's defense.

"It leaves petitioners exposed to what may well be the chemical equivalent of 
being burned at the stake," she wrote.

Death row inmate Thomas Arthur, sentenced to death over a murder-for-hire 
scheme in 1982 challenged the state's use of midazolam. Like the Oklahoma 
inmates, Arthur said it would not render him unconscious before he received the 
lethal drugs.

Suhana Han, a New York-based attorney representing Arthur, said in a statement 
it was "too early to tell" the impact of Supreme Court decision.

"We will be studying the full opinion in detail as we pursue his constitutional 
claims before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama," the 
statement said.

Arthur has also challenged the methods employed by the state in conducting 
executions. Chief U.S. District Judge Keith Watkins last March stayed Arthur's 
execution, writing that there were substantial differences between witnesses on 
whether staff consistently administered a consciousness test to inmates after 
administering the sedative.

The Glossip ruling focused on the drugs used in the Oklahoma case.

The Alabama Attorney General's office has 14 days to file a brief on the impact 
of the Supreme Court's decision on the Alabama cases.

"The U.S. Supreme Court has spoken on the constitutionality of states' use of 
lethal injections and death penalty opponents cannot continue to indefinitely 
delay lawful executions," Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange said in a 
statement.

Due to the legal challenges and drug shortages, Alabama has not conducted an 
execution since July 25, 2013.

(source: Montgomery Advertiser)


OHIO:

Ohio judge sentences man to death in sledgehammer slayings


An Ohio judge on Monday sentenced a 20-year-old man to death for the April 2013 
sledgehammer murder of his girlfriend's mother and also gave him a life 
sentence for killing her father, the Summit County prosecutor's office said.

Shawn Ford was 18 when he murdered Jeffrey and Margaret Schobert 10 days after 
stabbing their daughter Chelsea, also 18, in the neck multiple times because 
she would not "be intimate" with him, prosecutors said.

Ford was found guilty in October of multiple counts of aggravated murder in the 
parents' deaths and of felonious assault for the attack on Chelsea Schobert, 
who spent a month in the hospital recovering from her injuries.

In the death penalty phase of the trial, a jury in Akron, Ohio, unanimously 
recommended Ford be executed for the murder of Margaret Schobert. He did not 
get the death penalty for the murder of Jeffrey Schobert, which jurors saw as 
less premeditated.

Prosecutors said Ford walked 8 miles to the Schoberts' house in New Franklin, a 
town south of Akron, and beat Jeffrey Schobert to death with a sledgehammer. He 
then used the dead man's cell phone to lure Margaret Schobert back to the house 
from the hospital where her daughter was being treated, and bludgeoned her to 
death.

Ford's attorneys argued he is intellectually disabled and ineligible for the 
death penalty. Last week Summit County Common Pleas Judge Tom Parker ruled that 
Ford was not mentally disabled and could be executed after 3 mental health 
experts ruled his IQ was not significantly below average.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that intellectually disabled defendants 
are not eligible for the death penalty.

At the sentencing hearing on Monday, Ford wept and apologized for his crimes, 
saying "I never wanted to hurt that girl and I never wanted to hurt the 
Schobert family."

Parker gave Ford an execution date of Dec. 29, 2015. However all Ohio death 
penalty cases receive an automatic appeal and all executions in the state have 
been suspended until 2016 after a Federal court judge ruling.

(source: Reuters)