[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., N.C., CALIF. USA

[Rick Halperin]

April 14



TEXAS----impending execution

Man set to be executed for killing San Antonio officer


Manuel Garza Jr. already had a lengthy criminal record and was wanted on 
outstanding warrants when a police officer working on a special team targeting 
property crimes stopped him at a San Antonio apartment complex in 2001.

"I knew he'd find out about the warrants and I didn't want to go to jail, so I 
just ran," Garza, who was 20 at the time, would say later.

Officer John "Rocky" Riojas jumped out of his patrol car, leaving the door open 
and engine running, and chased Garza into a maze of walkways at the complex. 
After Riojas caught Garza, a witness saw Garza get his hands on Riojas' gun 
during a struggle that left the 37-year-old San Antonio SWAT officer dead from 
a gunshot to the head.

Garza is scheduled to be executed Wednesday evening for Riojas' killing. The 
35-year-old Garza would be the 6th convicted killer put to death this year in 
Texas, which carries out the death penalty more than any other state. He would 
be the 1st inmate executed with a new small supply of pentobarbital recently 
obtained by Texas prison officials.

If 2 other lethal injections set for this month are carried out, officials once 
again will have exhausted the state's supply of the execution drug. After that, 
Texas' stock of the increasingly difficult-to-obtain sedative will need to be 
replenished or a new chemical found as a replacement to handle at least three 
more executions on the schedule starting next month.

No late appeals for Garza were pending in the courts Tuesday. The U.S. Supreme 
Court refused to review his case last year.

Garza was taken into custody the day after the Feb. 2, 2001, shooting. Evidence 
showed he fled the scene with Riojas' gun and sold the .40-caliber Glock to a 
relative who then tried to sell it to a police informant after learning from TV 
reports that the officer's weapon was missing. The informant alerted 
authorities who traced the semi-automatic pistol back to Garza.

In a statement to detectives, Garza blamed Riojas for the shooting.

"I truly think this was the cop's fault," he said. "I don't see why he wanted 
to pull out his gun."

He asked for justice and for the courts to "please have mercy on me and give me 
the benefit of the doubt."

"I wasn't raised right," he added.

Defense attorneys contended Garza, whose criminal record began at age 14, was a 
product of childhood neglect and abuse.

Bill Pennington, one of the Bexar County prosecutors handling the case, said a 
key part of the guilt-innocence portion of the trial focused on defense efforts 
to characterize the shooting by Garza as accidental.

"It wasn't an issue of whether he did it or not," Pennington said last week.

A Bexar County jury deliberated about three hours before convicting Garza. At 
the trial's punishment phase, prosecutors called some 60 witnesses over 2 days 
to detail Garza's lengthy criminal history that included burglaries, thefts, 
escaping from custody and leading police on a chase in a stolen car.

Pennington said Riojas was "a larger than life kind of guy that everybody knew 
and everybody respected."

"The entire police force felt like they had their heart tugged out of them when 
he died," the prosecutor said.

(source: Associated Press)






PENNSYLVANIA:

Pennsylvania DAs take aim at Wolf's death penalty moratorium


Pennsylvania's prosecutors are warning Gov. Tom Wolf's death penalty moratorium 
could affect plea bargains and how judges and juries view executions.

The Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association released a friend-of-the-court 
brief Tuesday that said the Democratic governor has misinterpreted the term 
"reprieve," arguing his moratorium violates the state constitution.

The prosecutors say reprieves can only halt a criminal sentence for a defined 
period of time and for a reason that relates specifically to a particular 
convict.

Wolf announced the moratorium in February, suspending plans to execute Terrance 
Williams for a 1984 robbery and fatal tire-iron beating of another man in 
Philadelphia.

The governor argues the current system is error-prone and expensive. He plans 
to issue reprieves while a legislative committee prepares a report about the 
state's use of capital punishment.

(source: Associated Press)






NORTH CAROLINA:

Hearing set for suspect in robbery linked to Lake Wylie double homicide


A federal judge has ordered a court hearing next month for a convicted felon 
with Bloods gang ties charged in connection with the armed robbery of a 
Charlotte mattress store owned by a Lake Wylie couple, who were later shot and 
killed in their lakefront home.

Jamell Cureton, 22, is demanding that charges against him be dropped because of 
what was seized by federal agents from his jail cell in January.

U.S. District Judge Max Cogburn on Tuesday ordered the hearing for 10:30 a.m. 
May 13 at the federal courthouse in Charlotte, court documents show.

The FBI has claimed that the killings are tied to gangs and to the May robbery 
of Doug and Debbie London, and any decision on Cureton's robbery charges could 
be key to whether he could face additional charges connected to the double 
homicide. Cureton has been in jail since the alleged robbery, during which Doug 
London shot him.

In October, 5 months after the robbery, the Londons were gunned down in what 
prosecutors say was an attempt to keep Doug London from testifying against 
Cureton and his brother, Nana Adoma, 20, the alleged lookout in the robbery, 
and David Fudge, 22, another Bloods gang member police have said drove the 
getaway car. None of the 3 has been charged in connection with the killings.

In late January, police charged Malcolm Hartley, 21, of Charlotte, and his 
girlfriend, Briana Johnson, 19, of Concord, N.C., with murder in connection 
with the killings. Investigators then confirmed the killings were tied to the 
robbery. Both could face the death penalty if convicted.

On Jan. 12, just days before Hartley and Johnson were charged, FBI agents 
investigating the killings seized materials from Cureton's cell at the 
Mecklenburg County Jail. Among the items seized were photographs of lawyers and 
judges, prompting federal authorities to order protective measures for the 
judges and lawyers.

Cureton's lawyer, Chiege Okwara, claims the items seized from Cureton's cell 
are protected under attorney-client privilege. She has asked the judge to 
dismiss all charges against him and set him free.

(source: The Herald)






CALIFORNIA:

Brown's death row proposal short-term solution to a long-term problem


California's death row, which is the largest in the nation, has run out of 
room. In a plea to the legislature, Governor Jerry Brown has asked for $3.8 
million to provide 100 additional cells to contain the influx of death row 
inmates. However, Governor Brown has chosen to ignore the root of the issue in 
light of just throwing money at the problem.

Regardless of whether you support or oppose capital punishment, the fact 
remains that opening 100 cells will only temporarily relieve our death row 
woes, rather than eliminating them entirely. Faced with this problem, 2 options 
must be considered: either abolishing the death penalty and removing the need 
for a death row and specialized facilities, or a streamlining of our current 
system.

When faced with the decision of rather or not to keep the death penalty, many 
concerns arise on both sides. Opponents claim it constitutes an eye for an eye, 
and there are numerous cases of innocent people being wrongly condemned. 
Proponents argue that it serves as an effective deterrent against violent crime 
and may be more cost-effective than a sentence of life without parole.

Possible moral dilemma aside, the fact remains that Proposition 34, which aimed 
to eliminate the death penalty in California, was defeated by voters in 2012. 
Regardless of morality, democracy is democracy, and the last thing we want is a 
failure to follow the desires of voters in the higher echelons of government, 
lest our leaders become tyrants. Since a majority of California voters do 
support capital punishment, our focus should be on fixing our mismanaged death 
row, rather than eliminating it in the face of a majority.

Ever since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978, the state has spent 
approximately $4 billion in death row upkeep. Condemned prisoners need special 
cells and special guards, and the lengthy appeals process that comes with a 
death sentence often keeps prisoners in limbo for years on end. To look at it 
another way, we have spent $308 million per prisoner executed, and only 13 
people have been executed since 1978. Furthermore, a ruling that the current 
lethal injection protocol was unconstitutional has put a moratorium on all 
executions since 2006. In fact, 11 more prisoners on California death row have 
committed suicide than have been executed since 1978, highlighting the 
inefficient, arbitrary nature of California's death row.

Unless the promised punishment is carried out, death row will fail to serve as 
a deterrent in our corrections system. While it is macabre to discuss, an 
integral part of having a death row is performing actual executions. 
Furthermore, the selection process for executions at time of writing is wholly 
arbitrary, keeping the condemned in a cruel limbo where they never know whether 
or not they will be chosen for the next execution, should it ever come. This 
waiting game is tantamount to torture, which violates the federal Constitution 
and serves no punitive purpose. Likewise, a failure to carry out capital 
punishment, which is desired by a majority of voters, is failing to heed the 
desires of the voting public.

The other main hurdle facing lawmakers is how to carry out actual executions 
after the current three-drug lethal injection protocol was deemed cruel in 
2006. Since then, the state's hands have been tied, as there currently is no 
set execution protocol in place. Rather than getting into gory detail, I would 
like to point out that other methods of execution do exist, and these should be 
explored in the face of overcrowding in lieu of the nothingness the state has 
adopted since 2006. While a repugnant task, this is something that has to be 
carried out if our death row system is to stay in place, or else death row will 
have to expand ad infinitum.

In addition, the appeals process for the condemned needs to be streamlined. The 
Constitution guarantees a right to a speedy trial, and oftentimes the appeals 
process can be more cruel than waiting for a day of execution. In fact, the 
lengthy appeals process and the arbitrary nature of which condemned prisoners 
are selected was ruled unconstitutional in 2014. Instead of putting money into 
expansion, why not instead use additional capital to open more courthouses? 
That way, there would be less prisoners existing in a flux on death row, 
waiting for their appeals to finish. Once they exhaust their appeals or waive 
their right to continue, the sentence should then be carried out.

With any "hot button" issue, there is undoubtedly passionate discourse from 
both sides of the argument, and capital punishment is certainly no exception. 
Regardless of rather you are for or against the death penalty, the fact remains 
that we live in a democracy, and the majority has ruled that the death penalty 
should exist in California. Now is not the time for beating around the bush, 
now is the time for action, and to make death row viable in California a total 
overhaul is needed, not a delaying tactic of adding 100 additional cells. As of 
now, the addition of cells won???t even guarantee that any sentences will be 
carried out, as the Department of Corrections has no viable plan for 
eliminating death row overcrowding long term, and a failure to plan is a plan 
to fail.

(source: University of Calif., Riverside, Highlander)






USA:

Aurora movie theater shooting trial: 12 jurors and 12 alternates will be 
selected Tuesday----2 jurors dismissed so far


At the start of the day, 93 potential jurors entered the courtroom for the 
Aurora movie theater shooting trial. 2 have been dismissed so far.

By the end of the day, the court will narrow the field to 12 jurors and up to 
12 alternates.

Potential jurors spent the morning answering questions from the prosecuting 
district attorney. DA George Brauchler questioned the potential jurors about 
media exposure, their feelings about expert witnesses and their understanding 
of legal concepts like "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "extreme indifference."

Interestingly, he also presented the jury pool with a scenario about 2 
hypothetical roommates. In the story, one roommate was an introvert who stayed 
home and the other was known to pick fights. Jurors were asked to consider if 
the introverted roommate bears any of the blame for the fights caused by the 
other roommate.

It appears that this analogy was designed to reveal if jurors would believe 
that the blame or responsibility for the shooting could be spread to others, 
presumably including the defendant's psychologist who reported him to CU campus 
police but declined a 72-hour psychological hold.

After a recess, the defense took over. Their questions asked jurors about how 
media coverage might affect their service, how they feel when they see the 
defendant and how they judge experts.

During their questioning, one juror was dismissed because of doubts they could 
presume the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Another was dismissed 
after lunch, when she expressed concern for her child, who was at Arapahoe High 
School during the shooting there.

Court officials initially summoned an unprecedented 9,000 prospective jurors. 
Experts say it was among the most complicated jury selections in U.S. history.

Both sides can excuse 22 people without cause during this final stage.

Because this is a death penalty case, legal observers say both sides will not 
hesitate to excuse a prospective juror who has a strong opinion they don't like 
or those that don't appear able to get along with others.

12 people were killed and 70 were wounded in the attack on July 20, 2012.

The defendant, James Holmes, appeared in court Monday, and laughed and joked 
with his attorney, Dan King, before the judge and potential jurors entered the 
courtroom, Zelinger said. He has a mustache and short-cropped hair.

Holmes has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to avoid the death penalty. 
However, the defense argued questionnaires showed about two-thirds of 
prospective jurors had already formed an opinion about whether the suspect is 
guilty, and 30 % had already concluded he should receive the death penalty.

If the panel convicts him, it must then decide whether to sentence him to 
death. If jurors find he was insane at the time of the shooting, he would be 
committed indefinitely to a state psychiatric hospital.

Opening statements are scheduled for April 27.

District Court Judge Carlos Samour has estimated that the trial, including the 
sentencing phase, will be over Labor Day.

(source: thedenverchannel.com)