[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, TENN., NEV., CALIF., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

May 22



OHIO----new death sentence

Cleveland man gets death penalty in Mr. Cars double murder



A judge on Tuesday imposed the death penalty on a 32-year-old man convicted of 
the execution-style murders of a couple during a break-in attempt at their 
family-owned car lot.

Joseph McAlpin will pay the law’s ultimate penalty in the 2017 shooting deaths 
of Michael Kuznik and Trina Tomola inside Mr. Cars on East 185th Street.

Common Pleas Court Judge Brian J. Corrigan, who presided over the three-week 
trial, condemned McAlpin to death row after the jury on Thursday recommended 
the death penalty in the trial’s 2nd phase.

McAlpin, who is believed to be the first defendant to represent himself in a 
death-penalty trial in Cuyahoga County’s history, thanked Corrigan and the team 
of county prosecutors for their patience with him during the trial. He also 
apologized to his own family for what he called “ignorant” declarations during 
trial that he would only accept full liberty or death.

McAlpin offered no words to the family of Kuznik and Tomola, who packed the 
courtroom’s gallery but chose not to address the court.

“My fight’s going to continue,” McAlpin, handcuffed in an orange jumpsuit, 
said. “I know people are tired of hearing that, but there’s not much else I can 
say.”

Cleveland City Councilman Michael Polensek, whose ward encompassed the 
Collinwood neighborhood where the car lot sat for 40 years, called McAlpin a 
“demonic killer” who rocked the entire neighborhood and the business community 
across Cleveland.

“This was never about retribution,” Polensek said. “This was about justice.”

After the hearing, Polensek told reporters that he felt death by lethal 
injection was “too good” for McAlpin.

“As far as I’m concerned he should be burned at the stake for what he did to 
that family,” Polensek said.

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Michael O’Malley read a statement from Kuznik’s 
family after the hearing in which they thanked law enforcement and the jurors 
who heard the case.

“Our hearts will be forever broken, and we are greatly relieved that justice 
has been served,” O’Malley said, reading from the statement.

Prosecutors put forth no additional evidence in the second phase of trial, and 
McAlpin called a handful of family members to testify on his behalf.

The jury reached its recommendation after about deliberating for less than an 
hour.

McAlpin has maintained his innocence throughout both phases of the trial.

Corrigan on Tuesday noted that McAlpin lived a difficult childhood. He shot 
himself in the leg with his mother’s gun when he was 5 years old, Corrigan 
said. He suffered seizures after he was hit in the head with a brick as a 
12-year-old, and found his mother’s body after she overdosed on heroin when he 
was 19. He also suffered sexual abuse.

Corrigan found that mitigation was not enough to outweigh the aggravated 
circumstances of the killings.

The car lot, which had been owned by members of Kuznik’s family since it opened 
in April 1975, closed after the killings.

“These crimes slowly eat at a community,” O’Malley said. “It’s through 
sentences like this that jurors, who are composed of people from our community, 
are just saying ‘we’ve had enough.’ People in this county have had enough.”

Prosecutors relied on DNA evidence, cellphone records and testimony from a man 
who admitted to helping McAlpin carry out what was supposed to be a simple 
burglary to steal cars and titles on April 14, 2017.

It was Good Friday and the couple, who had Easter baskets for their children in 
the back of their car parked outside the lot, were closing up for the day, 
prosecutors said. Those baskets remained in the backseat as the car sits in the 
custody of Cleveland police as evidence, prosecutors said.

Prosecutors say McAlpin entered Mr. Cars and shot Kuznik, 47, in the showroom. 
The bullet grazed Kuznik’s face before he ran to a backroom, where McAlpin 
stood over him and shot him in the top of his head, prosecutors say.

Investigators found McAlpin’s DNA in Kuznik’s back pocket, where prosecutors 
said he had put cash from 2 car sales earlier in the day. The cash was not 
found on Kuznik’s body.

Tomola, 46, tried to run from the building during the robbery. McAlpin shot her 
in the back of her head, near an exit, prosecutors said.

McAlpin also shot and killed the couple’s Doberman Pinscher, Axel, disabled the 
business’s surveillance system and stole a BMW sedan, prosecutors said.

Andrew Keener told jurors that he participated in the crime alongside McAlpin. 
Keener pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and is set to be sentenced 
after McAlpin’s trial wraps up. McAlpin’s brother, Jerome Diggs, has pleaded 
not guilty to charges including aggravated murder, and his case is pending.

(source: cleveland.com)

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

Rethinking Death Penalty in Ohio



It is one thing to argue about the basic morality of capital punishment. But 
there should be no controversy about putting to death people so mentally ill 
they did not understand that murder is wrong.

Ohio legislators are considering a bill that would amend capital punishment 
statutes. It would ban the death penality for people who were suffering from 
“serious mental illness” when they committed murder.

The law already permits trials to conclude with verdicts of “not guilty by 
reason of insanity.” It also protects those considered “incompetent to stand 
trial.” The new proposal would add additional layers, designed to ban execution 
for those who, at the time they killed, suffered from conditions that 
“significantly impaired” their ability to think rationally.

Care must be taken not to give free passes to murderers who knew they were 
committing serious crimes, of course. But if that can be done, lawmakers should 
give the bill serious consideration — in the interest of justice.

(source: theintelligencer.net)








TENNESSEE:

Family of man executed for Marine’s brutal 1985 rape, murder seeks DNA testing 
of evidence



The daughter of a Tennessee man executed for murder in 2006 is asking that DNA 
evidence in the case be tested to determine once and for all if her father 
raped and killed a U.S. Marine more than 30 years ago.

Sedley Alley was put to death in the July 11, 1985, murder of Lance Cpl. 
Suzanne Marie Collins, who was stationed at the Naval Air Station Millington, 
as was Alley’s wife. Collins, 19, was abducted as she went on a run on the 
base, where she had just completed a 9-month course in avionics.

Her body was found the next day in nearby Edmund Orgill Park, according to The 
Daily Memphian. The Virginia native, who was set to graduate from the training 
school the day she was found, was severely beaten, with an autopsy showing she 
had been struck about 100 times, authorities said.

Collins was also strangled and sexually violated with a tree branch. The New 
York Times reported that her killer stripped the branch of its leaves and 
twigs, sharpened one end to a point and drove it repeatedly into her body with 
enough force that it pierced her lung.

Alley, then 29, was arrested the following day and charged with Collins’ 
murder, the Memphian reported. He confessed but later recanted the confession, 
saying it had been coerced.

Alley said he could not remember what happened the night Collins was killed 
because he had been drinking heavily. He was convicted in 1987 and sentenced to 
death.

April Alley, who, along with her brother, witnessed her father’s execution, 
filed a petition May 1 in Shelby County Criminal Court seeking DNA testing on 
evidence found at the scene, including a pair of red men’s underwear 
investigators believe were worn by Collins’ killer. According to the Memphian, 
the petition seeks the post-conviction DNA testing that was denied Sedley Alley 
prior to his death.

It also asks that Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee use his executive authority to order 
the testing on the evidence, which a legal team from the Innocence Project 
verified is still intact and housed in storage. That evidence includes the 
victim’s underwear, the 31-inch branch used to penetrate her and a sample of 
Sedley Alley’s DNA, which the Times reported was collected and stored before 
his death.

The case marks the first attempt to use DNA evidence to clear someone who has 
been executed for a crime, Stephen Ross Johnson, a Tennessee attorney working 
on the case alongside the Innocence Project, told the Memphian.

“There have been other cases where certainly people have been exonerated and 
come off death row,” Johnson told the newspaper. “There have also been 
situations where DNA testing (was done) after someone died in prison, but this 
will the first one where someone was subjected to capital punishment and then 
their DNA tested.”

The Innocence Project, which represented Sedley Alley in his appeals, sought to 
have the evidence tested for DNA before his execution. The Tennessee parole 
board recommended that then-Gov. Phil Bredesen order the testing, but Bredesen 
instead told Alley’s lawyers to seek relief through the court system.

The courts denied Alley’s request.

“The Tennessee courts incorrectly ruled that Mr. Alley was not entitled to DNA 
testing, even if the testing could produce a match to a 3rd party with a 
history of committing similar offenses,” Innocence Project officials said 
earlier this month.

The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that the lower court’s denial was incorrect 
in 2011, 5 years after Sedley was put to death. The high court ruled in State 
v. Powers that Tennessee’s post-conviction DNA law intended to allow defendants 
to prove their innocence by comparing their DNA to that from other possible 
suspects, including suspects whose genetic profiles are in the FBI’s Combined 
DNA Index System, or CODIS.

“The courts got it wrong in 2006 when they allowed Mr. Alley to be executed 
before testing the DNA,” said Barry Scheck, a co-founder of the Innocence 
Project. “If Mr. Alley were alive today, he would be entitled to DNA testing 
under the Powers ruling and the plain language of the post-conviction DNA 
analysis statute. We now have a chance to learn the truth in this case.”

A recent tip has also raised the possibility that another man accused in a rape 
and murder in another state might be the true killer in Collins’ case, the 
Memphian reported. The court petition filed by April Alley identifies the 
potential alternate suspect as Thomas Bruce, who, according to the St. Louis 
Post-Dispatch, is accused of sexually assaulting 2 women and killing a 3rd at a 
Missouri Catholic supply store in November.

Bruce was taking courses at the same avionics training school as Collins in 
1985, the petition states.

“I just want the truth,” April Alley wrote in an email to the Memphian. “The 
DNA evidence should have been tested before my father was executed. It’s too 
late for my father, but it’s not too late to find the truth. The court or 
governor should order DNA testing.”

The case against Sedley Alley

The night she was attacked, Collins left the barracks for her daily 10-mile 
run, the Times reported. Around 11 p.m., 2 other Marines passed her, jogging in 
the opposite direction.

The Marines moments later dodged a station wagon swerving in the road, headed 
in the same direction as Collins, the Times said.

A few seconds later, the men heard a woman screaming, “Don’t touch me! Leave me 
alone!”

They ran toward the screams and saw what they believed to be the same station 
wagon stopped alongside the road, the Times reported. It sped off as they 
approached.

The men ran to the barracks gate, where a guard sounded an alarm for a possible 
abduction.

Sedley Alley was stopped about an hour later near the base, driving a 1972 
station wagon, the newspaper said. He did not have any visible injuries, 
according to a Navy investigator.

After talking to Alley’s wife, investigators concluded the two Marines had 
heard the couple arguing and, not knowing that Collins was then missing, 
canceled the alert for the station wagon, according to the Times. The Alleys 
were sent home and a guard was put on their home.

Collins’ body was found the next morning, and Alley was arrested.

Investigators said Alley told them he had hit Collins with his station wagon 
while driving drunk and then accidentally stabbed her in the head with a 
screwdriver. The petition filed by his daughter states that the medical 
examiner determined neither of those claims was accurate.

Alley later said investigators only turned on their tape recorder after he told 
them what they wanted to hear.

Physical evidence used to tie Alley to the crime included Type O blood on the 
driver’s side door of the station wagon. That type matched Collins, but it also 
matched Alley’s blood type, the Times said.

Paper napkins from a local restaurant were also found in the car and on the 
ground near Collins’ body, and an air conditioner pump found in the station 
wagon had reportedly been installed at a home near where Collins was jogging, 
the paper said.

No physical evidence from Collins was found inside the car or on Alley, the 
Times said. The petition for DNA testing also indicates that a witness on the 
base reported seeing a second station wagon carrying a couple -- potentially 
Alley and his wife -- around the time of Collins’ abduction.

Despite the lack of direct physical evidence, Alley was for decades after his 
conviction assumed to be the killer. An investigator in 2003 found a 
handwritten note, however, in which the medical examiner in Collins’ case 
estimated she had died after Alley and his wife were sent home that night -- 
and while military police were watching the family’s home.

The investigator also learned that a boyfriend of Collins’ drove a station 
wagon and matched the approximate height of a man seen near the site of her 
abduction, while Alley was about 8 inches taller, the Times said. Alley’s 
complexion and hair color also failed to match the description from a witness.

Alley told his daughter a few weeks before his death that if he committed the 
heinous acts Collins was forced to suffer, he deserved to be executed, the 
court petition says. He told her he did not remember committing the crime, 
however, and did not believe he had.

Scheck said if the killer’s DNA can be pulled from the evidence, it can not 
only be tested against the known sample from Alley but can also be compared to 
profiles uploaded to public genealogy databases.

Dozens of cold cases have been solved over the past year using genetic 
genealogy, including murder cases decades old.

“The public’s interest in having the right defendant brought to justice extends 
beyond the life of a single defendant,” Scheck said. “If Tennessee executed the 
wrong person in 2006, the actual perpetrator may still be free to harm other 
people. This is a matter of public safety.”

(suorce: Atlanta JOurnal-Constitution)








NEVADA:

Defense Lawyer Loses Bid to Get Judge to Kill Death Penalty



A state court judge rejected a bid by a defense lawyer on Tuesday to declare 
Nevada's death penalty unconstitutional because the 2 most powerful lawmakers 
in the Legislature are also career prosecutors.

Attorney JoNell Thomas, representing a man facing 3 upcoming capital murder 
cases, said Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro and Assembly Speaker Jason 
Frierson — both Democrats and deputy Clark County district attorneys — killed 
debate in the Legislature about capital punishment.

Clark County District Court Judge Douglas Herndon agreed with Thomas that 
Nevada may be unique among U.S. states to have part-time legislatures led by 
party leaders whose full-time jobs are to enforce the law.

Neither the judge nor Thomas said they could find previous instances in other 
states or court cases on the question.

Thomas argued the legislative leaders' roles as prosecutors and law enforcers 
make them different from elected state representatives who are defense 
attorneys, firefighters or teachers.

"The people who enforce the law can't make the law," she said.

Herndon, a former Clark County prosecutor, declined to decide that question.

He said his role is to administer proceedings to determine if 27-year-old 
defendant Alonso Perez is guilty — and a jury decision on punishment if he is.

"This is not really a forum to investigate whether there is legislative bias or 
why particular representatives may or may not have done something, whether 
they're prosecutors or anybody else," he said, adding that if there is 
impropriety in the Legislature, it would be up to elected lawmakers to address 
it.

Herndon also denied Thomas' request to order Clark County District Attorney 
Steve Wolfson to turn over copies of any emails, memos and telephone records 
between supervisory prosecutors and prosecutors serving in the Legislature.

Cannizzaro and Frierson did not immediately respond to messages about the 
ruling.

Thomas declined outside court to comment, but said later she'll "likely" appeal 
Herndon's ruling to the Nevada Supreme Court.

Wolfson, who was in the courtroom for the hearing, said he thought Herndon 
reached a "proper conclusion." The district attorney also noted that Perez's 
attorneys were making similar arguments before other judges handling his other 
murder cases.

Perez faces separate murder trials next year in slayings dating to August 2016.

The court filing on his behalf seeks a finding that the death penalty in Nevada 
is "invalid because the legislative process ... has been compromised due to 
prosecutorial interference and dominance in Nevada's Legislature."

It claims that Wolfson, as Cannizzaro's and Frierson's employer, exerted 
improper authority over legislative leaders and "indirect authority over his 
subordinates" to kill debate on the death penalty.

Nevada has almost 80 inmates on death row. The state has not conducted an 
execution since 2006.

Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, has said he opposes the death penalty except in 
extreme circumstances. He has declined to comment about Thomas' death penalty 
challenge.

(source: Associated Press)








CALIFORNIA:

Palm Springs police officers recount grief as jury considers death penalty for 
Felix



Emotional testimony filled an Indio courtroom Tuesday, as a jury began to weigh 
whether John Hernandez Felix will get the death penalty. The "penalty phase" of 
the trial started the morning after the same jury found Felix guilty on 
1st-degree murder for the killing of 2 Palm Springs police officers in 2016. 
Expressing anger, sadness and regret, several officers who survived the 
shooting took the stand and attempted, though visibly distressed by their 
memories, to explain to the jury how on Oct. 8, 2016, their lives were changed 
by the deaths of officers Jose "Gil" Vega and Lesley Zerebny.

Former Officer Abraham Vargas told the jury he was trained, in part, by Vega. 
He had a strong bond with the veteran officer, Vargas said, and that they even 
joked in the department that Vega was training Vargas to be his replacement.

The shooting changed his life, Vargas told the jury, and he hopes justice is 
served.

Vargas has since retired from the force, he said.

John Hernandez Felix has been found guilty on all counts for the 2016 murders 
of Palm Springs Police officers Jose "Gil" Vega and Lesley Zerebny. Officer 
Jeffrey Burton suffered one gunshot wound, and shrapnel from another round is 
still lodged in his right calf and left hip. Burton described Vega as a "father 
figure" and Zerebny as a "little sister." He joked to the jury that Vega would 
take him to "Swiss Thursdays," a Coachella Valley pastry chain, where the 2 got 
donuts.

"He taught me that in training," Burton said, in one of the few moments that 
smiles interrupted the somber courtroom mood.

Burton briefly described to the jury that he went to lunch with Zerebny days 
before the shooting and spoke to the new mother about being a parent and the 
"crazy things little girls do."

The shooting has left Burton with a short temper, he said, and led him to seek 
treatment for post-traumatic stress.

"Sadness, anger, frustration," Burton said, "you name it and I've felt it."

Burton said he still feels those emotions today.

Burton is still on the force and said he now treats every call like it's a 
"life or death call."

Officer Byron Farley described Vega to the jury as a "good man." They were both 
fans of the Dallas Cowboys, and they'd chat about the team when they crossed 
paths in the police locker room.

"If you met him," Farley said, "you liked him."

Farley told the jury that he was Zerebny's primary training officer. During the 
academy, he said, they spoke once a week and patrolled together for some time 
during her first months on the force.

"She knew her job and she did her job," Farley said.

He described the anger, disbelief and, ultimately, the regret he felt and still 
feels.

"I should have taken the call," Farley said. "I should have been there sooner. 
I missed something."

Farley said he's had some difficulty coping with his emotions after the 
shooting. He never returned to patrol and retired on medical leave in 2018.

"I shut down," he told the jury, "stayed away from people,"

Sergeant Shawn Flynn testified that Vega wasn't scheduled to work the day that 
he was killed. He was covering a shift for another officer who had requested 
the day off. He said he is disappointed in himself as he continues to struggle 
with his grief.

"I always tell my officers to back each other up," Flynn said. "I tell them we 
all go home together at the end of the shift. I lost two to officers in the 
worst way possible and three retired that day."

Michelle Paradise, one of the prosecuting attorneys, told the jury at the 
beginning of the penalty phase that it is now their responsibility to hold the 
convicted man accountable.

"As a society we have established laws and punishments that reflect those 
values that we hold dearest to us," Paradise told the jury, "and we reserve our 
most severe punishments for those most heinous crimes, those crimes that tear — 
literally rip apart — the fabric of our community."

In this case, Paradise said, the jury is considering the lives of 2 people who 
chose to put on a uniform and protect the community. Now dozens of lives, from 
their colleagues to their family members, will never be the same.

Paradise displayed photos of the officers while she spoke to the jury. When she 
projected a photo of the fallen officer Lesley Zerbny, her infant daughter, who 
was sitting on her father's lap in the hushed courtroom, began to cry. Others 
in the jury and the audience also began to weep.

When testimony concludes, Paradise told the jury, the prosecutors will ask for 
the death penalty.

Jake Devane spoke to the jury on behalf of Felix's defense team.

"Your verdicts of guilt, no one is questioning that," Devane said. "What you 
are now deciding is what will be appropriate punishement in this case."

The defense plans to call Felix's family members and doctors who assessed his 
mental health. Devane asked the jury to look at the evidence they'll be shown 
with fresh eyes and to consider whether life without parole is due punishment.

In the coming days, prosecutors will attempt to persuade the jury that Felix 
deserves the death penalty. Felix's attorneys will argue for leniency. The same 
jury found him guilty on all counts after approximately four hours of 
deliberations.

The trial began on April 17, with the prosecution describing in graphic detail 
how Felix used an AR-15 to fire 21 rounds at Palm Springs police officers who 
had arrived at his house around noon on Oct. 8, 2016, in response to a domestic 
dispute.

Vega and Zerebny were the first officers to arrive at the Felix home on Cypress 
Avenue in northern Palm Springs. When Felix refused to exit the home, the 
officers attempted to open the metal security door — that’s when shots erupted.

Ultimately, the two officers suffered fatal injuries, one other survived a 
gunshot wound, and several others were injured during the shootout.

Felix left the house and surrendered to SWAT officers more than 12 hours later 
and only after the home was flooded with teargas.

(source: The Desert Sun)

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

Defense Begins Effort to Spare Cop Killer from Death Sentence



A Palm Springs resident who gunned down 2 police officers suffers from 
intellectual disabilities and should be spared from a death sentence, a defense 
attorney told a jury Tuesday, but a prosecutor said the man deserves the 
severest of punishments.

“Guilt does not equal punishment,” defense attorney Jacob DeVane told jurors 
during his opening statement in the penalty phase of John Hernandez Felix’s 
trial, during which jurors will recommend a death sentence or a prison term of 
life without parole. “Mr. Felix is not the worst of the worst even in light of 
the crimes you have convicted him for.”

Felix, 28, faces a possible death sentence for the Oct. 8, 2016, killings of 
Officer Jose Gilbert Vega, 63, and Officer Lesley Zerebny, 27. Jurors on Monday 
convicted Felix of 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, along with 6 counts of 
attempted murder stemming from the shots he fired at other officers outside the 
defendant’s family home in the 2700 block of Cypress Avenue, where they had 
gone in response to a domestic disturbance call.

DeVane said factors such as Felix’s auditory processing disorder — which he 
described as a mental defect — along with a below-average IQ and drug use 
during the 2016 attack should all be considered mitigating evidence.

“You are not deciding guilt or innocence,” DeVane told jurors. “But what you 
are deciding is what would be the appropriate punishment in this case.”

Deputy District Attorney Michelle Paradise countered that the killings of 2 
police officers warranted the death penalty.

“As a society, we establish laws and punishments that reflect those values that 
we hold dearest to us,” she said. “And, we reserve the most severe punishment — 
the death penalty — for those crimes that tear, literally rip apart, the fabric 
of our community. Those crimes that prey upon the innocent, and in this case, 
the heroic.”

Paradise said Felix preyed on “the honorable” and “the outstanding,” and said 
the “true motive” behind the shooting was “his hatred for law enforcement.” She 
also pointed to his criminal past, noting that he previously served four years 
in prison, and said the death penalty is the most appropriate punishment.

Felix was also convicted of unlawful possession of an assault weapon, unlawful 
weapon possession by a prohibited person and unlawful possession of ammunition. 
The jury rejected allegations that Felix was wearing body armor during the 
shooting.

They also found true special-circumstance allegations of murder of a peace 
officer and multiple murders, opening Felix to the possible death sentence.

Vega and Zerebny were the first Palm Springs police officers killed in the line 
of duty since Jan. 1, 1962, when Officer Lyle Wayne Larrabee died during a 
vehicle pursuit. The only other death in the department was that of Officer 
Gale Gene Eldridge, who was fatally shot on Jan. 18, 1961, while investigating 
an armed robbery.

Vega had been with the department 35 years — 5 years past his retirement 
eligibility — and had planned to retire in 2018. He had 8 children, 11 
grandchildren and 5 great-grandchildren. Zerebny had been with the department 
for 18 months and had just returned to duty following maternity leave, having 
given birth to a daughter, Cora, 4 months earlier.

(source: mynewsla.com)

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

Lawyer who didn't practice law for 2 decades removed from death penalty case



A California lawyer who was appointed to represent a capital defendant after a 
longtime absence from law practice is no longer on the case.

Lawyer Gary Turnbull, now 74, was ousted from the case at the request of the 
defendant, Juan Pablo Vega, who is accused of killing 2 people at a nightclub, 
the Los Angeles Times reports. Turnbull had regained his law license in October 
after he did not practice law for nearly 2 decades.

The American Civil Liberties Union had sought Turnbull’s removal in Vega’s Kern 
County case partly because of his long law-practice hiatus. The ACLU also cited 
Turnbull’s past sexual relationships with two daughters of a client who was 
accused of killing her husband. The relationships took place in 1986 and 1988, 
before and during the woman’s trials, according to past coverage by the Los 
Angeles Times. Turnbull had fathered a child with one of the daughters.

Cassandra Stubbs, director of the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project, told the 
Los Angeles Times that Turnbull’s removal is a positive development. “This 
continues to show the need for a closer look at the way the death penalty 
system is broken in California,” she said. “There are so few mechanisms for 
oversight over, really, this abysmal quality of lawyering.”

Turnbull had been appointed to Vega’s case because of a conflict of interest by 
the public defender’s office. The public defender had represented Vega’s 
girlfriend, accused of soliciting the murders.

Turnbull was suspended from law practice in 1995 for not paying child support 
and in 2004 for not paying bar dues. Turnbull said he didn’t renew his law 
license because he had cancer and moved to Canada. In a court filing, Turnbull 
said he had handled more than 100 criminal jury trials during his career and 
had attended 300 hours of death penalty seminars.

Turnbull told the Los Angeles Times last month that the California bar never 
found his relationship with the client’s daughters to be unethical. “According 
to court rules, I’m totally qualified,” he said.

Turner told the Los Angeles Times he is handling 2 other capital cases.

(source: abajournal.com)








OREGON:

Oregon Senate Passes Bill Limiting State Death Penalty



A proposal to pare down Oregon’s death penalty law is moving forward, after 
being approved by the state Senate on Tuesday.

With little fanfare — and zero debate — what some regard as the most meaningful 
effort to curtail the death penalty in recent memory passed in an 18-9 vote 
that largely stuck to party lines.

If passed in the House and signed by Gov. Kate Brown, Senate Bill 1013 would 
redefine the crime of aggravated murder, the only offense punishable by death 
in Oregon. The bill would strip out many elements that currently constitute the 
crime, moving them to newly created classes of murder.

Moving forward, aggravated murder would be limited to homicides where 2 or more 
people are killed to intimidate a civilian population or influence a government 
— crimes that are associated with terrorist acts. Defendants who murdered 
children under the age of 14, or killed another inmate while serving time for a 
murder conviction, could also be sentenced to death.

Additionally, the bill would change the questions Oregon jurors must answer in 
order to sentence a defendant to death, removing a query about whether the 
person is likely to be dangerous in the future. Death penalty opponents argue 
that question is impossible to answer, and could result in Oregon’s law being 
found unconstitutional.

“At this point, we have found that the system and the statute is not complying 
with what we want and what we intended,” said state Sen. Floyd Prozanski, 
D-Eugene, a chief backer of the proposal and the only senator to speak on 
either side of the issue before Tuesday’s vote.

He and other supporters of the bill argue that capital punishment rarely gives 
much closure to families of victims since cases can take decades to fully 
resolve. They also contend the process is expensive. A 2016 study found death 
penalty cases can cost between $800,000 and $1 million more than cases where a 
defendant is facing life without parole.

Debate over the bill has injected uncertainty into ongoing criminal cases that 
could involve death sentences. Perhaps most prominently, the trial of a man 
accused of murdering two men on a Portland light rail train was recently 
delayed until next year, partly out of concerns over changes to the law.

Capital punishment was approved by voters in 1984, and could not be removed 
from the Oregon Constitution without a public vote. While opponents of the 
death penalty concede such a vote could be a tough sell, they have argued 
lawmakers have the prerogative to alter what crimes are punishable by death.

People who’ve opposed the bill, meanwhile, have said the law should not be 
changed without input from voters. That’s a sentiment that’s been shared by 
House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, who could block the bill’s path in the 
House. Kotek said Tuesday she needed to read the bill in its current form 
before commenting on whether it would get a vote.

Despite being on the books, capital punishment is rarely used in Oregon. 
Then-Gov. John Kitzhaber declared a moratorium on executions in 2011, and Gov. 
Kate Brown has continued the policy. Just two inmates have been executed in the 
state in the last 50 years, and both had ceased fighting their sentences.

(source: opb.org)

********

Potential law change looms in murder case involving Grass Valley woman



A possible change in Oregon law would affect the man accused of a Grass Valley 
woman’s death, removing the possibility of the death penalty as a punishment.

Justin Lee Graham-Yaeger, 33, faces charges of aggravated murder, murder and 
first-degree robbery in connection with the death of Sierra Clemens, 23, in 
Medford, Oregon. Arrested May 3, Graham-Yaeger appeared Monday in Jackson 
County Circuit Court and was given a copy of his indictment. He’s next 
scheduled for court on June 12.

If convicted of aggravated murder, Graham-Yaeger would have a jury determine 
his sentence — death, life in prison without parole or life with a chance of 
parole after 30 years, said Allan Smith, senior deputy district attorney with 
the Jackson County, Oregon, District Attorney’s Office.

Prosecutors currently aren’t seeking the death penalty, Smith added.

“That’s a decision we’ll make down the road,” the prosecutor said.

A murder conviction brings a life sentence, with the possibility of parole 
after 25 years, Smith said.

Legislation moving through the Oregon Legislature, Senate Bill 1013, would 
alter aggravated murder if passed.

Currently someone can face an aggravated murder charge if they meet one of 
several criteria. In Graham-Yaeger’s case, it’s the robbery charge.

The bill would significantly limit the criteria for aggravated murder, and 
Graham-Yaeger no longer would be eligible, Smith said.

“If this goes through, he would not be eligible for aggravated murder or the 
death penalty,” he added.

The bill also would create new charges: 1st- and 2nd-degree murder. Someone 
convicted of 1st-degree murder would receive a life sentence with the chance of 
parole after 30 years. A 2nd-degree murder conviction also would warrant a life 
sentence, but with the chance of parole after 25 years, Smith said.

The bill hasn’t yet reached a vote of the Oregon state Senate, records show.

According to reports, officers found Clemens’ body after responding May 3 to a 
disturbance at a Medford motel. Moments later they found Graham-Yaeger hiding 
in a Dumpster. A police dog bit Graham-Yaeger during his arrest. He was treated 
at a hospital before being booked into jail.

(source: theunion.com)

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

Voters should get a say on death penalty



A bill before the state Legislature that would dramatically curtail the cases 
in which the death penalty could be applied passed the state Senate on Tuesday 
and now heads for the House.

But in the House, the bill might well run into a major roadblock: Speaker of 
the House Tina Kotek has said in the past she believes such a major revision in 
Oregon capital punishment laws should go before the state's voters. She said 
this week that she would need to read the latest version of the measure, Senate 
Bill 1013, before making a final decision — but it certainly is true that the 
speaker has the power to stop a bill from advancing in the Legislature.

Here's a case where Kotek is right: This is something that the state's citizens 
deserve a chance to consider.

To be fair, Senate Bill 1013 is a well-crafted and clever bit of legislation. 
The bill redefines the crime of aggravated murder (the only crime in Oregon 
statutes that can be punished by death), so that it includes acts of terror 
that kill 2 or more people. The bill has been revised so that it includes two 
other instances in which a defendant could be sentenced to death: cases in 
which the victim was under the age of 14 or in which a defendant killed another 
inmate while serving time for a murder conviction.

Other offenses that currently qualify as aggravated murder under state law, 
such as killing someone during the course of a rape or robbery, would be 
reclassified as another type of murder, and the maximum punishment for those 
would be life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The proposed legislation also would change one of the four questions juries 
must decide when considering whether to impose a death sentence. Oregon jurors 
now must determine whether a person guilty of aggravated murder is at risk of 
being a danger in the future. The bill would remove that question, which is 
fine: It's an unfair and unscientific duty to ask jurors to tackle.

The bill passed the Senate on Tuesday on a largely party-line 18-9 vote. Among 
mid-valley legislators, Sen. Sara Gelser, a Democrat, voted in favor of the 
measure; Sen. Fred Girod, a Republican, voted against it.

For a bill that has drawn a measure of attention this session, the floor debate 
in the Senate on Tuesday was remarkably restrained: Only Sen. Floyd Prozanski, 
the influential Eugene Democrat who's led the charge on the bill, spoke.

The main argument opponents have raised against the bill — and the very point 
that Kotek is pondering — is that such a major change to state law on capital 
punishment should be referred to voters.

And that's what the Legislature should do.

The verdict of Oregon voters over the last century on capital punishment has 
been mixed: Capital punishment was outlawed by voters in 1914 and then 
re-enacted in 1978. 3 years later, the state Supreme Court ruled that the death 
penalty was unconstitutional, paving the way for a 1984 initiative in which 
voters reaffirmed capital punishment.

Since then, though, the topic has been rarely revisited in Oregon. After 
then-Gov. John Kitzhaber imposed a moratorium on capital punishment in 2011, he 
made a halfhearted effort to goad the Legislature into action, but the proposal 
didn't gain any traction. Gov. Kate Brown has said that she plans to continue 
the moratorium, but hasn't taken much of an active role on the issue.

Oregon hasn't executed a prisoner since May 1997; the state has 32 men and 1 
woman on death row.

It's very possible that the opinions of Oregonians have changed since that 1984 
initiative, as the national debate over the death penalty has taken intriguing 
twists and turns in the 35 years since then. But there's only one way to find 
out for sure. The Legislature should let voters decide.

(source: Editorial, KVPI news)








USA:

High court bickering over death cases, weeks after…



The Supreme Court shined an unusual light Monday on its internal squabbling 
over the death penalty, with the justices making public more than 30 pages of 
arguments on issues they decided weeks ago.

The high court almost never revisits opinions after the fact, though Monday was 
the second time this spring that the justices returned to arguments in an 
already-decided death penalty case. A decision in a Missouri death penalty case 
in April featured the justices also tussling in writing over a prior decision 
involving an Alabama death row inmate.

The justices frequently get asked to step in to halt executions at the last 
minute, and the spats aired Monday involve cases the court ruled on in March 
and April. In the more recent case, Alabama asked the Supreme Court to step in 
and allow the execution of Christopher Lee Price, whose execution had been 
halted by a lower court after he raised a challenge to the state’s lethal 
injection procedure.

The Supreme Court fractured 5-4 along liberal-conservative lines to allow his 
execution.

In that case, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for himself and his liberal 
colleagues that the conservative majority’s decision to let the execution go 
forward “calls into question the basic principles of fairness that should 
underlie our criminal justice system” and was evidence that “death sentences in 
the United States can be carried out in an arbitrary way.”

On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a 14-page response to, he said, “set 
the record straight.” Thomas said there was “nothing of substance” to Breyer’s 
claims. An “accurate recounting” of the circumstances surrounding the case show 
it was “set to proceed in a procedurally unremarkable and constitutional 
acceptable manner,” he wrote.

The justices’ original decision in the case came after Price’s death warrant 
expired, so a new execution date had to be set. Price, who was convicted of 
murder in the 1991 stabbing death of pastor Bill Lynn, is now set to be 
executed May 30.

Also on Monday, Justice Samuel Alito issued a new statement in the case of a 
Texas death row inmate, Patrick Murphy. Murphy, a Buddhist, asked the Supreme 
Court to halt his scheduled March execution if officials wouldn’t let his 
spiritual adviser accompany him into the execution chamber. Texas argued that 
only chaplains who had been extensively vetted by the prison system were 
allowed in the chamber and that while Christian and Muslim chaplains were 
available, no Buddhist priest was.

The high court ultimately granted Murphy a temporary reprieve. At the time, 
only Thomas and Justice Neil Gorsuch noted their disagreement but did not write 
to explain why. On Monday, Alito issued a 14-page statement in which he called 
the court’s decision “seriously wrong.” He said the issue Murphy raised was an 
important one, but he faulted Murphy for an “inexcusable delay” in raising it.

“If the tactics of Murphy’s attorneys in this case are not inexcusably 
dilatory, it is hard to know what the concept means,” Alito wrote. He added 
that the justices are asked to get involved at the last minute in “virtually 
every execution” and that in the “great majority of cases, no good reason for 
the late filing is apparent.” He said that by tolerating “such tactics, the 
Court invites abuse.”

In response, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who previously voted to halt Murphy’s 
execution and said Murphy had not delayed , issued another statement. Despite 
“greatly” respecting Alito’s position, he disagreed. He pointed out that after 
the court’s decision, Texas changed its policy so that no religious ministers 
are allowed in the execution room, only an adjacent viewing chamber. Kavanaugh 
called that a “prompt resolution.”

(source: brinkwire.com)