[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., MISS., LA., TENN., IDAHO, USA

[Rick Halperin]

April 11



FLORIDA:

Put Death Penalty Cases on Hold



Florida's current death penalty scheme is about to be examined under the 
Supreme Court's microscope. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear 
a case involving a Florida man, Timothy Hurst, who was sentenced to death after 
a jury voted 7 to 5 in favor of death. While we don't know how the court will 
rule in Hurst v. Florida, the court could very well strike down Florida's death 
penalty statute and require new penalty trials in scores of cases.

What makes this case unique is that Florida is the only state in the country 
that fails to impose any unanimity requirement on jurors during capital 
sentencing decisions. Only a simple majority - or 7 out of 12 jurors - must 
vote for death in Florida, and they don't have to agree on a single aggravating 
circumstance.

Delaware is the only other state that allows a simple majority to recommend a 
death sentence, but it first requires unanimous agreement on at least 1 
aggravating circumstance. Alabama requires a minimum 10-2 vote for death, but 
likewise requires all 12 jurors agree on at least 1 aggravating circumstance.

The court would be absolutely right to strike down Florida's capital-sentencing 
statute, as having a unanimity requirement is critical in capital cases.

Unanimous jury decisions produce more reliable results than do majority 
decisions. Requiring unanimity means that differing viewpoints have to be 
weighed and considered, and jurors spend more time reviewing and discussing the 
evidence, both of which lead to more accurate and fair results.

Since 2006, the Florida Supreme Court has not overturned any death sentences 
imposed after a jury's 12-0 death recommendation.

Florida also has the dubious distinction of having released more people from 
death row because of wrongful convictions than any other state - 25 men in less 
than 40 years.

Even the most ardent supporters of capital punishment should question whether 
our current system truly protects against the most egregious error that our 
justice system can make.

Every other decision by a jury in Florida - including civil contract disputes, 
property disputes, traffic or misdemeanor trials - requires unanimity. Why not 
for a death sentence?

Judges and prosecutors can take steps right now to mitigate the impact that a 
ruling overturning Florida's death penalty statute will have on current death 
penalty cases by temporarily pausing these cases until a decision is rendered 
by the high court. This will save these cases from having to be retried in the 
event the court tosses out the statute.

Retrying these cases will place an incredible burden on the victim's family 
members. Already having dealt with the harsh loss of their loved ones to 
violent crime, they are forced to relive that experience when they sit through 
the lengthy trial that follows - an experience that is often traumatizing in 
and of itself. If the sentences from current cases are thrown out, victims' 
families will be subjected to this painful process all over again, which will 
be both agonizing and unfair.

Retrying these cases will also place an incredible financial burden on the 
state. Having participated in 2 capital trials, I have seen how long and 
expensive they are. Additional court services, attorneys, mitigation 
specialists, investigators, and a multitude of expert witnesses are generally 
required.

One recent study by Seattle University found that capital cases in Washington 
state regularly cost at least $1 million more than cases where a sentence of 
life without parole is sought. A similar study released by the Nevada State 
Auditor last year found that seeking the death penalty nearly doubles the cost 
of the trial, appeals and housing combined.

Unnecessarily retrying all of these cases could cost Florida taxpayers tens of 
millions of dollars, a significant - yet completely avoidable - expenditure of 
taxpayer resources.

For all of these reasons, it is only prudent for local prosecutors and trial 
judges to temporarily pause current death penalty trials pending a ruling in 
Hurst.

Waiting a few additional months until this case can be decided is not just 
responsible, but given that the average death penalty case in Florida takes 
more than a decade to complete, a delay of a few months will hardly be noticed.

Failing to wait for an outcome in Hurst, however, could result in expensive and 
painful consequences.

(source: Stuart Hartstone is the acting executive director of Florida Capital 
Resource Center, a nonprofit organization that assists defense attorneys 
representing men and women facing the death penalty; The Ledger)

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

Shorstein calls for death penalty reforms



2 weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a Florida death penalty 
case, Hurst vs. Florida, that questions the constitutionality of Florida's 
entire death penalty sentencing scheme.

The court could throw out the whole thing, and they'd be right to do so.

Florida is 1 of only t3 states in the entire country that doesn't require 
juries in death penalty cases to come to a unanimous decision when sentencing 
someone to death.

In fact, Florida is the only state to allow the jury to take a simple majority 
vote, requiring agreement of only seven of 12 jurors to impose a death 
sentence.

Florida also does not require the jury to be unanimous in its finding of even a 
single aggravating factor - that is, an additional factor, such as a robbery - 
that makes the crime eligible for the death penalty in the first place. This 
may seem like a minor detail, but I prosecuted death penalty cases for 30 years 
in our state, and I can tell you that it can lead to very unreliable results.

When we don't require jury verdicts to be unanimous in death penalty cases, we 
leave open the possibility that jurors with differing opinions will be totally 
excluded from the decision-making process. The views of as many as 5 jurors can 
be completely ignored.

No other state permits such lenient sentencing practices - not even Texas.

And if jurors don't have to come to a unanimous decision, they don't have to 
spend as much time considering every aspect of the case or clarifying jury 
instructions that are often confusing to some jurors.

Every other decision by a jury in any Florida court - even for a civil contract 
dispute, property dispute, traffic court or misdemeanor criminal trial - 
requires unanimity among the jurors. We do not permit this kind of simple 
decision-making in car accident cases. How can we permit it in death penalty 
cases?

More importantly, Floridians deserve a justice system that does not make 
irreversible mistakes especially when it comes to the decision of life or 
death.

We know the current system is far from perfect. 25 men have been released from 
Florida's death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. This is more 
than any state in the U.S.

Allowing non-unanimous jurors only exacerbates this serious problem. 
Non-unanimous verdicts are much more likely to be overturned by the Florida 
Supreme Court because of serious errors.

If our nation's highest court finds Florida's outlier practices in capital 
sentencing unconstitutional, any death sentences imposed during the pendency of 
the case will be invalid. The prudent course of action for trial courts is to 
stay any capital proceedings until the court has issued its decision. This will 
ensure that the basic system we have in place for making a life and death 
decision is constitutional.

Capital punishment comes with a hefty price tag that is far more costly than a 
life sentence. Some recent studies estimate the cost of a death penalty trial 
is almost double the cost of trial where death is not being sought.

If the court invalidates the Florida statute, the state will be forced to try 
each of these cases again. That means the taxpayer will be on the hook for 
funding the staggering costs of a capital trial twice.

It also means that the victims' families could be dragged through yet another 
painful and lengthy trial process. These cases are already difficult for and 
brutal on the victims??? families. We should do everything we can to help them 
avoid the agony of 2 trials.

The Florida criminal justice system invests massive amounts of time, energy, 
and resources into administering the death penalty.

While our nation's highest court deliberates, Florida has an opportunity to 
avoid untold and unnecessary costs. Until we know whether our death penalty is 
constitutional, the wisest course of action is for judges and prosecutors to 
put capital cases on hold in our state.

(source: Guest Column; Harry Shorstein is the former state attorney for the 4th 
Circuit which includes Duval, Clay and Nassau counties----The Florida 
Times-Union)








MISSISSIPPI:

State wants execution drug supplier's name kept secret



Attorney General Jim Hood has asked the Mississippi Supreme Court to keep 
secret the identity of the state's execution drug supplier while he appeals a 
state judge's order that the name be released.

Hinds County Chancery Judge Denise Owens ruled last month that the state's 
public records law requires officials to release the information, sought by 
death-penalty opponents at the Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center.

"Without protection for the identity of drug supplier, the state will be unable 
to obtain new supplies of the drugs necessary to carry out lethal injection 
executions when ordered to do so by this court," Hood's office wrote in 
documents filed Thursday.

Hood said making public the company's name now would make the Mississippi 
Department of Corrections' appeal "futile and meaningless." The Supreme Court 
has not ruled on the motion.

At issue is the identity of the pharmacy providing pentobarbital, a barbiturate 
used to render prisoners unconscious before they are injected with a paralytic 
agent and a heart-stopping drug.

In 2012, the state bought pentobarbital from a compounding pharmacy in Grenada, 
called Brister Brothers, which mixed the drug. After the MacArthur Center 
discovered the name following an earlier records request, state lawyers said 
the pharmacy refused to make further sales and that the drugmaker cut off its 
supply to Brister Brothers.

State lawyers say it's important to preserve the ability to buy the drug. 
Nationwide, concerns have been raised about problem-filled executions because 
of novel drug combinations as older sets of drugs become unavailable. 
Mississippi's supply of pentobarbital is supposed to expire May 20, unless a 
new supplier is found.

After ruling for the plaintiffs, Owens on April 1 denied the state's motion to 
freeze her order during the appeal.

"It seems obvious that the attorney general's office fears that disclosing the 
truth about these drugs may show a serious possibility of the kind of torture 
we've seen in the recent botched executions in other states," MacArthur Center 
lawyer Jim Craig wrote in an email Friday. "As Mr. Hood must know, that 
disclosure would cause the courts to stop any Mississippi executions during 
this election year."

Craig has yet to formally respond to Hood's Supreme Court filing.

On April 2, Owens ordered the state to pay $13,423.12 in attorney's fees and 
other expenses, finding that access had been unreasonably denied.

(source: Associated Press)








LOUISIANA:

In Louisiana prosecutor offices, a toxic culture of death and invincibility



A couple of years ago, I wrote about the ongoing problem of prosecutor 
misconduct, using Louisiana as the poster state to explain why even egregious 
misconduct not only isn't punished but also is often incentivized. The story 
began with an interview with John Thompson, a man wrongly convicted of 2 crimes 
and sentenced to death. Thompson was eventually exonerated, and now runs a 
non-profit that helps the wrongly convicted reintegrate into society. But 
Thompson's name is also on a landmark Supreme Court decision that denied him 
compensation for his conviction. I bring the piece up because it discusses the 
macabre culture of death that pervades some prosecutor offices in Louisiana.

Thompson was up against a prosecutorial climate that critics had long claimed 
valued convictions over all else, one that saw a death sentence as the 
profession's brass ring.The New York Times reported in 2003 that prosecutors in 
Louisiana often threw parties after winning death sentences. They gave one 
another informal awards for murder convictions, including plaques with 
hypodermic needles bearing the names of the convicted. In Jefferson Parish, 
just outside of New Orleans, some wore neckties decorated with images of nooses 
or the Grim Reaper.

One of Thompson's prosecutors, Orleans Parrish Assistant District Attorney 
James Williams, told the Los Angeles Times in 2007, "There was no thrill for me 
unless there was a chance for the death penalty."

Williams kept a replica electric chair on his desk. "It was hooked up to a 
battery, so you'd get a little jolt when you touched it," recalls Michael 
Banks, one of Thompson's attorneys. In 1995, Williams posed with this 
mini-execution chair in Esquire magazine. On the chair's headboard, he had 
affixed the photos of the 5 men he had sent to death row, including Thompson. 
Of those 5, 2 would later be exonerated and 2 more would have their sentences 
commuted.

Williams is no longer in office. But as James Gill writes in the New Orleans 
Advocate, the bloodlust persists in other parts of the state.

If it weren't for Caddo Parish, capital punishment would have been largely 
phased out in Louisiana by now.

And Caddo largely owes its pre-eminence to just 2 prosecutors, Dale Cox and 
Hugo Holland. Of the 8 death sentences handed down in the last 5 years, Cox 
takes credit for 4 and Holland for 2. Such numbers suggest they approach their 
grisly duty with relish. Indeed Cox, who is chief assistant district attorney 
up there, recently said it is a shame that executions aren't more frequent . . 
.

"I think we need to kill more people," he said. He believes "we're going the 
wrong way with the death penalty; we need it more than ever, and we're using it 
less now." He and Holland have certainly done their best to keep the executions 
coming.

Holland is no longer on the DA's staff in Caddo. He and another assistant, Leah 
Hall, who was also on the prosecution team in 4 of the successful capital 
cases, were fired in 2012 after obtaining a slew of automatic rifles from the 
Federal Property Assistance Agency to be used in the course of highly hazardous 
- but imaginary - joint operations with police and sheriff's departments.

Holland and Hall remain in the prosecution game in various Louisiana 
jurisdictions. Hall last year pulled a gun on a colleague in the Claiborne 
Parish DA's office. Holland is currently under investigation by the state bar's 
Disciplinary Board for failing to turn over evidence favorable to David Brown, 
1 of 5 Angola lifers tried in 2012 for the murder of a guard. Brown's death 
sentence was thrown out late last year.

Cox, meanwhile, remains much possessed by death in Caddo Parish and is fond of 
invoking Scripture when urging juries to show no mercy.

That sort of attitude is particularly frightening given two other factors: The 
number of exonerations in the state, and the complete lack of accountability 
for prosecutors who break the rules. As I pointed out in my 2013 article, one 
of the points Justice Clarence Thomas made in his majority opinion in the 
Thompson case was that discipline and sanctions from state bar associations are 
a sufficient deterrent to prosecutor conduct (as opposed to civil or municipal 
liability). The problem? In both the state and municipality that gave rise to 
the Thompson case, bad prosecutors have been punished somewhere between barely 
and never. Perhaps more importantly, this has continued to be the case since 
the Thompson ruling came down. Longtime defense attorney Sam Dalton decided to 
test Thomas's theory in the Thompson case - that state bars were a good way to 
keep prosecutors in check - by filing complaints with the Louisiana State Bar's 
Office Disciplinary Counsel.

Dalton filed 8 complaints with the ODC in October 2011. By the following March, 
he had yet to even hear confirmation that the ODC had received his complaints. 
He sent another letter. He still received no response. In August of last year, 
he sent a colleague to the ODC office to at least make sure the complaints had 
been delivered. She was told that they hadn't. Dalton's colleague then produced 
the name of the ODC staffer who had signed for the FedEx package containing the 
complaints. At that point, the office conceded that it had in fact received the 
complaints, but was still researching them, and would notify Dalton by the end 
of the month. When he had received no response by the middle of September - 
nearly a year after his initial filing - Dalton sent yet another letter. As of 
this writing, he still has yet to hear back from the ODC.

I published that article in August 2013. It has now been 3 1/2 years since 
Dalton filed his complaints. According to my sources, Dalton finally received 
notice that the office had received the complaints shortly after my article 
ran. Since then, he hasn't heard a thing.

(source: Radley Balko, Washington Post)








TENNESSEE:

Challenging TN death penalty: 5 new things to know



Tennessee's death penalty is stalled and all scheduled executions have been 
delayed while both execution methods - lethal injection and its backup, the 
electric chair - are tied up in legal battles.

A group of more than 30 inmates is challenging the state's single-drug lethal 
injection protocol in Davidson County Chancery Court. Next month, the Tennessee 
Supreme Court will weigh whether the inmates can also challenge the electric 
chair.

The inmates say both methods are unconstitutional because they create risk of 
cruel and unusual punishment or lingering death.

Filings and hearings led to some developments last week. Here are 5 things you 
need to know:

--The Tennessee Supreme Court stayed all execution dates while the cases are 
pending. 4 death row inmates had scheduled dates, but those have been removed 
from the calendar. None of the 69 inmates on death row is currently scheduled 
to die.

--Attorneys for the inmates submitted evidence to the Supreme Court that the 
lethal injection chemical cannot be gotten through legal means. An affidavit 
from Dr. James Ruble, a pharmacist and pharmacy professor in Utah, says he 
contacted companies that supply the active ingredient in pentobarbital and none 
had it available.

--Davidson County Chancellor Claudia Bonnyman clarified in court Friday, citing 
a state Supreme Court opinion, that the attorneys for the inmates are 
challenging the lethal injection protocol as it is written, and not the 
qualifications of the people who carry out executions. It means the inmates' 
attorneys will not be able to interview or examine pharmacists who prescribe 
lethal injection drugs.

--Attorneys for the condemned inmates suggested in Chancery Court that the 
Tennessee Department of Corrections has a separate execution protocol being 
kept secret, but that they need to examine as part of their case. More 
information on that is expected to come in later hearings.

Attorneys: 'White out' glitch reveals lethal injection pharmacist

--The attorneys will return to Bonnyman's courtroom on April 17. The attorneys 
for the inmates are expected to outline their case and what they intend to 
present during trial. Trial is set for July. Bonnyman ruled that trial will 
only deal with the lethal injection challenges. (source: The Tennessean)








IDAHO:

Looking at the death penalty in Idaho



This week, Adam Dees was charged with 3 counts of 1st-degree murder in the 
killing of 3 people in their Foothills home. He could face life in prison or 
even the death penalty if convicted of the crimes. We will not find out yet 
whether prosecutors will seek the death penalty, but that could happen soon.

While Adam Dees sits in jail, 11 people sit on Idaho's death row awaiting 
execution. It has been almost three years since the last execution carried out 
by the state of Idaho. Richard Leavitt was put to death in June of 2012 for the 
1984 murder of a Blackfoot woman. We asked former Ada County Prosecutor David 
Leroy why it takes so long to execute an inmate sentenced to death.

"Any death penalty case needs to be very carefully examined by society, 
certainly by the defendant, the prosecutors want to be careful and so there are 
frequent appeals and sometimes subsequent appeals on many different issues," 
said Leroy.

He said the appeals can drag on for several years, and then several more years 
at the federal level.

"The prosecutor's judgement to request the death penalty in any case is driven 
by the unique circumstances of that case and of that defendant," Leroy day.

Dees charged with murder in Foothills triple slaying

In Idaho there is a list of 11 aggravating circumstances. At least one must be 
proven beyond a reasonable doubt before a prosecutor can even give notice to 
seek the death penalty. Dees' attorney has said he has bipolar disorder and 
schizophrenia, but a mental illness is not a defense in Idaho.

"If someone was not able to deliberately premeditate a crime, it is likely that 
the prosecutor would not be able to prove that element beyond a reasonable 
doubt," Leroy said. "So while we have no mental disease or defect defense in 
criminal cases in Idaho, we still must deal with tthe mentality of a criminal 
to make sure they can commit the crime with which they're charged."

Dees has not entered a plea. Once he does, the Ada County prosecutor has 60 
days to decide whether to seek the death penalty.

Leroy never asked for the death penalty during his time as prosecutor. He says 
it's hard to know whether the county will ask for the death penalty without 
knowing more of the details of the crime.

(source: KTVB news)








USA:

Why The Death Penalty Has No Place In America



It's not everyday you find comments from one of the most Progressive members of 
Congress aligning with Libertarian and pro-liberty minded folks.

After Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was found guilty on all 30 counts of inhumane acts of 
terrorism, Senator Elizabeth Warren said in an interview, "My heart goes out to 
the families here, but I don't support the death penalty. I think that he 
should spend his life in jail. No possibility for parole. He should die in 
prison."

Tsarnaev's trial should be the example of how the United States will ultimately 
bring justice to radical Islamists during a period where they will stop at 
nothing to kill for their beliefs. Being a perpetrator of radical Islam and 
killing innocent human life, Tsarnaev is morally disgusting and twisted - and 
that barely touches the surface. He is receiving a fair trial and the people 
involved with this trial and this tragedy are receiving answers to their 
questions.

That's what justice for all is about.

Revenge is about getting equal. About getting a fair shot in return for the 
damage that someone or something has caused. Today, society is bent up in this 
culture of revenge, of getting equal. And it is reflected in the attitude that 
so many people share about the death penalty.

Having an attitude of revenge when dealing with the murder of innocent life 
isn't justice. It's an excuse. Justice is having to answer to questions about 
actions that you have taken. Justice is having to live with the consequences 
you have taken. Justice is having the whole world see who you truly are.

Revenge isn't that.

The death penalty is revenge shaped into the form of an overbearing government. 
They print the money, tax us to death, and kill us because a few people and men 
in suits agree. What more can we ask for?

The Eighth Amendment was crystal clear: "Excessive bail shall not be required, 
nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

What's more cruel and unusual than death by government?

If you wanted that, just go to Iraq, Iran, China, or North Korea. They could 
care less if the syringe didn't kill you within 2 minutes - they make it quick.

If we want justice to play out for the families affected by Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's 
actions, revenge is not the answer. The answer isn't to allow the power and 
force of government to equal and echo the immoral and twisted behavior of a 
terrorist. The answer is to be morally superior to his actions.

Elizabeth Warren is right in calling for Tsarnaev to stay in jail. That's where 
he belongs for the remainder of his life.

If death by government force is the morally superior answer to justice in this 
case and in cases all around the United States, then boy do we have a long way 
to go.

(source: About the Author: An aspiring filmmaker with a passion for 
liberty-minded politics, Charles Barr resides in Monmouth County, New Jersey 
and attends Montclair State University with the intention of graduating in 2017 
with a double major in filmmaking and political science and a minor in 
communications----thelibertarianrepublic.com)