[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----IND., TENN., OKLA., CALIF., USA, US MIL.

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 30



INDIANA:

Major Davis II speaks for 1st time since arrest in officer's death----Davis 
calls prosecutor's office 'vindictive'



Major Davis II is now in his 7th month behind bars.

He's the focus of a death penalty case following the July 2014 shooting death 
of Indianapolis Metro police officer Perry Renn.

"I pray for Officer Renn and his family in light of their loss, but I was not 
the one who took his life," Davis said, in his first TV interview since his 
arrest.

Davis' statement is a contradiction to the volume of evidence that places him 
at the scene of the crime.

Documents show IMPD responded to reports of shots fired near 34th and Forest 
Manor after 9:23 p.m.

Emergency dispatchers received calls for help that have not been made public 
because of the pending trials.

Among the callers was LaTasha Ruffin, who's the mother of Davis' children.

The Marion County Prosecutor's Office says Ruffin on the recording reportedly 
said, "The police just shot my f*ing boyfriend," and then added, "They shot 
each other."

Officer Renn died from the injuries received in the line of duty.

An AK-47 variant rifle was found next to where Davis fell.

The 25-year-old Davis was initially reported dead, but he was revived by 
emergency medical personnel.

RTV6 reached out to Davis' family in November and via email they agreed to talk 
last week at the Marion County jail.

While Davis declined to speak about the shooting, he agreed to talk about the 
ongoing legal case and the possibility of the death penalty.

Since Davis mentioned Officer Renn by name, Call 6 Investigator Rafael Sanchez 
asked about the deadly incident.

Sanchez said, "A lot of folks believe the wrong person died that night. They 
believe you should have been the one to have died, because they believe you are 
the one who caused someone's death. Do you understand that?"

(source: theindychannel.com)








TENNESSEE:

DA to seek death penalty for teen accused of Roan Mountain murder



District Attorney General Tony Clark filed notice this week in Carter County 
Criminal Court that the state will seek the death penalty against one of the 2 
teens charged with 1st-degree murder in the death of Danny Ray Vance.

Clark is seeking the death sentence for Anthony Joseph Lacy, 18, Roan Mountain. 
The state is not seeking capital punishment for the co-defendant in the case, 
Demetrice Cordell, 19. The 2 are accused of going to Vance's home on July 4 to 
rob him.

Vance's body was found at 10 that morning, lying on the front porch of his 
Heaton Creek home. He had a fatal injury to the back of his head caused by 
blunt force. A large rock, which had broken in 2, was found nearby. Vance was 
wearing an empty holster on his hip. Family and friends said Vance normally 
carried a .380-caliber Smith and Wesson pistol in the holster.

The 2 teens were early suspects in the investigation and were questioned a 
short time later at the residence of Cordell's grandfather. Vance's pistol was 
reportedly found in a gym bag. Investigators said Lacy admitted he killed Vance 
by hitting him in the head several times with the rock.

Clark, in his notice to the court, gave 2 specific aggravating circumstances 
for seeking the death penalty.

The 1st circumstance was that Lacy was previously convicted of another felony 
involved the use of violence. Lacy has not yet been convicted of that case, 
which is an attempted 1st-degree murder charge levied after an Oct. 23 incident 
where Lacy allegedly beat Carter County Corrections Officer Dwight Lacey with a 
mop handle while Lacy was being held in pretrial confinement. Lacey was injured 
so badly he has only recently been able to return to work.

In the event that Lacy is not convicted in that case, Clark said that 
aggravating circumstance will be withdrawn.

Clark said the 2nd aggravating circumstance was that Lacy "knowingly committed" 
the Vance murder while attempting to rob him.

Lacy is also facing another aggravated assault charge stemming from his 
pretrial confinement at the Carter County Jail. That charge stems from an 
alleged incident Aug. 30 in which corrections officers responded to an 
altercation and reported finding Lacy standing up and inmate James Buckingham 
lying on his back under a bunk in a pool of blood. The washer of a fire 
sprinkler head was believed to be the weapon used in the attack and guards 
found evidence of digging in the concrete of the cell.

Because of the number of charges Lacy has received while in pretrial 
confinement, the teen has been transferred to the custody of the Department of 
Corrections.

During his tenure as district attorney, Clark has sought the death penalty in 
only 1 other case, Howard Hawk Willis in Washington County. Only one Carter 
Countian, David McNish, is currently on death row. He was convicted on Aug. 15, 
1984. 2 other Carter Countians, William Matney Putnam and Donna Sexton, pleaded 
to life sentences to avoid the death penalty in 1990. The youngest person on 
death row is Sedrick Clayon of Shelby County. He is 31 years old and has only 
been on death row for a month. A few on death row were only 21 when they were 
sentenced.

(source: Johnson City Press)








OKLAHOMA:

Pain and punishment; Richard Glossip and the death penalty



Worldwide attention has been fixed on Oklahoma State Penitentiary recently as 
Oklahoma is one of a handful of state's pushing ahead with state-funded 
execution for convicted murders.

Capital punishment has come under fire recently as lethal injection drugs 
became unavailable, opening the door for last-minute legal maneuvering and 
re-igniting the discussion on cruel and unusual punishment.

According to the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, the average execution age 
is 38 years old. Most prisoners will be housed on death row, known as H-Unit, 
12 years before their time is up.

Richard Glossip has lived on H-block for 17 years. His execution date was 
delayed twice, and is currently on stay by the U.S. Supreme Court.

"It's like you're in a tomb," Glossip said during a rare death row interview 
with Ali Meyer. "Just waiting to die so they can finish it off."

Glossip's tomb was sealed shut by 2 juries following the brutal murder of Barry 
Van Treese.

Van Treese was the owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City in 1997. The 
motel handyman bludgeoned him to death while he slept.

The state first arrested the young handyman, Justin Sneed, and then went after 
Glossip alleging a case of murder-for-hire.

"My daughter begged him not to go that day. She was 7 (years old)." said Barry 
Van Treese's widow, Donna Van Treese.

The murderers left Barry Van Treese's 7 children fatherless; his wife a widow, 
the single-mom of 5 young kids.

"The toughest job I've ever had ... How do you tell your kids they're never 
going to see their dad again?" Donna said.

18 years since the day she lost her husband, and Donna Van Treese is ready for 
his killer to die.

She is unconcerned about a dignified or merciful death.

"Really not. Did his victims, or any of the victims, have any choice in the way 
they died?" said Donna Van Treese. "Would I wish a cruel death on anyone? No. 
I'm hoping that it is quick."

Justin Sneed was the state's star witness, and the only proof Glossip was 
involved at all.

Both sides agreed, Richard Glossip wasn't even in the room when Barry Van 
Treese was murdered.

Prosecutors said hiring out the murder was worse.

Justin Sneed was spared his life. Prosecutors cut a deal so that Sneed was 
given a life sentence in exchange for his testimony against Richard Glossip.

Glossip said he was also offered a sentence of life in prison without the 
possibility of parole, but he declined the deal, because he refused to plead 
guilty for a crime he said he didn't do.

"We say now that we're going to reserve the death penalty for the worst killers 
in the worst killings. But it's clear in this instance that Mr. Glossip did not 
have the capability of taking another life." said Glossip's attorney, Mark 
Henricksen. "It seems bizarre that the person who did get a life sentence and 
the person who did not is a few days away from execution."

The U.S. Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

"The Supreme Court has expressed that we will not execute people cruelly. We 
will not torture people to death. It goes against American values, and Oklahoma 
certainly has not persuaded me that we've prevented that." Henricksen said.

The Oklahoma death chamber has a fresh coat of paint now, an updated protocol, 
and a to-do list 49 inmates long.

A few doors down from the execution chamber, Glossip, steadfastly declaring his 
innocence, says they have the wrong man.

Glossip had always maintained he is guilty of helping Sneed cover up the 
murder, after the fact. But, he said he had nothing to do with the planning of 
the crime.

"After the fact I made some stupid decisions. I'm not saying I didn't." said 
Glossip. "If stupid's a crime, I'm guilty of being stupid. But I've sure paid 
my price for that."

The Van Treese family has full confidence in the judicial process and in the 
verdict for both Glossip and Sneed.

"Without a doubt in my mind, they have who was responsible for masterminding 
it, and who was responsible for covering up afterward, and who was responsible 
for the actual crime." Van Treese said.

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon weigh in on Oklahoma's death cocktail and the 
question of whether it serves up sufficient portions of mercy and justice.

"The dying part doesn't bother me. Everybody dies. But, I want people to know I 
didn't kill this man. I didn't participate or plan or anything to do with this 
crime." Glossip said.

Donna Van Treese will not go to McAlester to witness the execution of her 
husband's killer.

(source: KFOR news)








CALIFORNIA:

Tentative ruling: California must adopt execution process



California must adopt a new process for executing condemned inmates after 
nearly 3 years of delays, a state judge ruled Thursday in a lawsuit filed by 
crime victims.

The tentative ruling by Sacramento Superior Court Judge Shellyanne Chang does 
not order the state to resume executions, which have been on hold since 2006. 
But she said corrections officials can't wait any longer to find a new way to 
conduct executions if they are reinstituted.

The lawsuit seeks to force state corrections officials to adopt procedures for 
a single-drug, barbiturate-only method of execution.

Chang found that the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has a 
duty to adopt execution procedures, but has the sole discretion to decide how 
the state will carry out the death penalty.

The department said it has been drafting new lethal injection regulations, 
without putting them into effect since Gov. Jerry Brown said in April 2012 that 
the state would switch to a single-drug lethal injection.

No executions can occur until the new rules are adopted by the department.

The department is reviewing the tentative ruling, said spokeswoman Deborah 
Hoffman. She previously said a nationwide shortage of execution drugs is 
slowing the process.

Chang's ruling will take effect unless officials can change her mind after oral 
arguments scheduled for Friday.

The suit was filed by a victims' rights organization on behalf of two relatives 
of murder victims who said they are affected by the delays.

Executions in California have been halted by a series of legal challenges over 
the past 8 years. State policy currently calls for using a series of 3 drugs to 
put condemned inmates to death, but the lawsuit cites a 2006 ruling by a 
federal judge who said California could resume executions if it began using a 
process that only uses barbiturates.

The plaintiffs argue that at least eight other states are now using a 
court-approved one-drug process and California should follow their lead.

The state attempted to have the lawsuit thrown out, but Chang found that the 
relatives have a right to file the legal action.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director for the Sacramento-based Criminal Justice 
Legal Foundation, which filed the lawsuit, called the tentative ruling a 
victory for crime victims.

"This is an area that has been evolving in the law, whether victims have any 
rights at all" or must merely watch the legal and regulatory process play out, 
Scheidegger said. The tentative ruling means victims do have rights when it 
comes to influencing state policies, he said.

Other legal challenges might still block executions even if new procedures are 
adopted.

A federal judge in Los Angeles ruled in July that carrying out the death 
penalty takes so long in California that it amounts to unconstitutional cruel 
and unusual punishment. Attorney General Kamala Harris is appealing that 
ruling.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Los Al Death Penalty Case Gets 3rd Judge in 3 Days Amid Charges of 
Prosecutorial Misconduct----Defense for both Mass Murderer Scott Dekraai and an 
actor accused of killing a man in a Los Al Theater alleges wide widespread 
misconduct.



Another Orange County Superior Court judge was assigned today to oversee a 
double-murder suspect's trial, marking the 3rd jurist switch within a week.

Judge James Stotler recused himself on Tuesday from the case of 30-year- old 
Daniel Wozniak, concluding he could no longer be impartial. Stotler stepped 
down amid defense allegations of misconduct in the use of jailhouse informants 
by sheriff's officials and prosecutors.

The case was then assigned to Orange County Superior Court Judge Thomas 
Goethals, who has been presiding over the case of convicted mass killer Scott 
Dekraai, who is making similar allegations of misconduct and is represented by 
the same attorney as Wozniak.

But prosecutors objected to Goethals handling Wozniak's case, so it was 
reassigned today to Orange County Superior Court Judge John Conley.

Wozniak's attorney, Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders, wants the Orange 
County District Attorney's Office off the case -- a remedy he is also seeking 
in Dekraai's case -- and has signaled that he will seek to have every judge in 
the county disqualified from overseeing Wozniak's death penalty trial.

Sanders is seeking an evidentiary hearing, much like the one he had in 
Dekraai's case, that backs up his allegations that sheriff's officials 
illegally used jailhouse snitches to solicit incriminating statements from 
defendants, including Wozniak.

Sanders contends the snitches are using threats of retaliation by the Mexican 
Mafia if some inmates don't confess to the informants. At issue in Wozniak's 
case is the contact the defendant had with informant Fernando Perez.

Senior Deputy District Attorney Matt Murphy has argued that Perez was not yet 
working for the government when he chatted up Wozniak and would not be a 
witness in the trial anyway.

Also at issue in the Wozniak case is an interview the defendant did for the 
MSNBC program "Lockup." Sanders alleges the interview was a set up by the 
defendant's jailers to make him look bad, but the producer of the program said 
she was not directed by sheriff's officials to interview Wozniak.

Last week, Stotler expressed some anxiety at the length of Sanders' expected 
motion to recuse the District Attorney in the case, which could be up to 20,000 
pages. He also refused to budge on a Feb. 13 trial date, despite Sanders' 
claims that he needed more time to file his motion.

The current Feb. 13 trial date is expected to be rescheduled because Murphy has 
another trial set for the month.

(source: patch.com)

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

'Selfish' Scott Peterson Deserves Death, CA Says



Before Scott Peterson, the sleepy town of Modesto, Calif. - population 201,000 
- made its name as the birthplace of wine behemoths Ernest and Julio Gallo and 
legendary filmmaker George Lucas, who immortalized the town in his 1973 ode 
"American Graffiti."

But on Christmas Eve, 2002, Peterson's wife of five years Laci - 8 months 
pregnant with the couple's 1st child - went missing. Peterson said he had left 
early that morning to go fishing at the Berkeley marina on the San Francisco 
Bay, 90 miles away, and that Laci was alive and well when he left.

As days passed and the search for Laci Peterson and the unborn Conner 
intensified, the media swarmed to Modesto. Despite Peterson's best efforts to 
keep his name and face from being associated with his missing wife, one woman 
took notice and called the Modesto Police Department tip line: Peterson's 
mistress, Amber Frey.

Conner's body washed ashore on April 13, 2003, in Richmond, a few miles north 
of the Berkeley marina. Laci's badly decomposed body was discovered a short 
distance away the following day.

Police arrested Peterson for the murders on April 18, in San Diego County. 
Besides changing his appearance - he had grown a goatee and dyed his hair - 
police found $15,000 in cash and foreign currency, two driver's licenses, 4 
cellphones, clothes for all sorts of weather and a considerable amount of 
survival gear when they searched Peterson's newly purchased Mercedes during the 
arrest.

After moving the trial from Stanislaus County to San Mateo County due to the 
extraordinary amount pretrial publicity in Modesto, prosecutors conviced jurors 
to convict Peterson of killing Laci and Conner in November 2004. They returned 
a death penalty verdict the following month, and San Mateo County Superior 
Court Judge Alfred Delucci, now deceased, sent Peterson to death row at San 
Quentin State Prison in March 2005.

7 years later, Peterson appealed his death sentence to the California Supreme 
Court. In a 423-page document filed in July 2012, Peterson maintained his 
innocence and said that the worldwide pretrial publicity - coupled with 
erroneous evidentiary rulings by Delucci - made it impossible for him to get a 
fair trial.

But in a 519-page answer filed Monday, the state countered that Peterson's 
consuming desire to be free of Laci and Conner led him to commit the murders. 
"Fueled by a trifecta of selfishness, arrogance and wanderlust, Scott Peterson 
decided to take matters into his own hands by planning and carrying out the 
murders of his wife and unborn child and then dumping their lifeless bodies 
into San Francisco Bay," the response, penned by deputy prosecutor Donna 
Provenzano and signed by Attorney General Kamala Harris, stated.

"Thankfully, the forces of nature did not oblige Peterson in his attempt to 
hide the evidence of his crimes," the document continued. "Although he was 
successful in ridding himself of those perceived irksome responsibilities, all 
the while portraying himself as the consummate husband and family man, 
ironically, Peterson forfeited his freedom in the end."

Peterson received a fair trial through the efforts of Delucci, "an experienced 
and respected jurist," Provenzano wrote.

"The trial court shielded the legal process from the searing gaze of the public 
and the media," she added. "The trial court's unrelenting dedication to the 
fairness of the proceedings also enabled the parties' attorneys to perform 
their respective functions in an effective manner geared toward divining the 
truth and helping the jurors to reach just verdicts."

The document also praised the work of the jurors, who endured 3 months of jury 
selection, a nearly 5-month-long guilt phase, and 2 rounds of sequestered 
deliberations in the case.

"Based on the compelling evidence adduced at trial, the jury fairly concluded 
that appellant, in an unmitigated act of selfishness and arrogance extinguished 
two beautiful lives - one of which appellant made certain would never see the 
light of day," Provenzano wrote. "The jurors duly considered whether there was 
anything about appellant's character, background, or actions that merited 
leniency.

"Having properly evaluated the penalty phase evidence, the jury determined 
appellant deserved the penalty of death. Thus, the criminal justice system did 
not fail Scott Peterson. On the contrary, the process was fair and the verdicts 
just," the filing stated.

Peterson's response is due March 27, although the high court routinely grants 
delay requests in high-profile cases.

The last execution carried out in California took place in 2006. A number of 
state and federal challenges of the Golden State's use of lethal injections has 
led to a de facto moratorium on the death penalty here, and the California 
Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice has opined that death 
sentences are unlikely to ever be carried out due to excessive delays at the 
appellate level and the high court's crushing backlog of death-penalty reviews.

(source: Courthouse News)








USA:

Why Are IQ Scores Still Being Used To Determine Who Is Fit To Be Executed?



This investigation was reported by Dana Goldstein and Maurice Chammah for The 
Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization focused on the U.S. criminal 
justice system.

Ever since the Supreme Court ruled that prisoners suffering from "mental 
retardation" - a now outdated term - could not face the death penalty in the 
2002 case Atkins v. Virginia, debates about whether a felon qualifies for 
execution have often revolved around a single number: an IQ score. On Tuesday, 
Georgia prisoner Warren Hill was executed for the 1990 beating death of a 
fellow inmate. His attorneys argued unsuccessfully that his IQ of 70 
disqualified him for the punishment. This evening, Texas is set to execute 
Robert Ladd for beating a woman to death with a hammer in 1996. His attorney 
has pointed out that Ladd's IQ of 67 would disqualify him from execution in 
most other states.

Last May, the Supreme Court built on the Atkins decision by ruling that Florida 
could not exclusively use a simple IQ cut-off when it determined who was fit 
for execution. "An IQ score is an approxi???mation, not a final and infallible 
assessment of intellectual functioning," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, 
demanding a more holistic approach by medical professionals. "Intellectual 
disability is a condition, not a number."

But how did IQ numbers become so central in death penalty cases in the first 
place? And why, even after the Supreme Court challenged their usefulness, are 
we still hearing about them?

The roots of these questions go back more than a century. IQ - intelligence 
quotient - dates to 1905, when the French psychologist Alfred Binet developed 
the 1st IQ test. Binet made clear that his test was not a measure of "innate" 
intelligence and should be used chiefly to identify children who needed help in 
school. Yet American eugenicists quickly popularized IQ as a tool for 
identifying people supposedly predisposed to crime, promiscuity, and low 
achievement in school and life. Courts and state agencies sometimes ordered the 
sterilization of people with low IQ scores. By 1925, IQ tests were in wide use 
in American public elementary schools to track students toward either the 
vocational or academic curriculum. Early IQ exams asked questions that required 
cultural knowledge, such as: "The forward pass is used in: tennis, handball, 
chess, football (circle one)." Unsurprisingly, IQ scores were correlated with 
race, class, and immigration status.

By the time Robert Ladd first took an IQ exam in 1970, at age 13, the testing 
was more sophisticated. As part of a psychiatrist's evaluation, ordered after 
Ladd committed arson, Ladd sat for the Wechsler intelligence test, which 
required less factual knowledge and more performance, such as verbally 
repeating a series of letters or numbers back to a proctor. Yet the test also 
included questions on vocabulary and arithmetic. That meant Ladd's score of 67 
reflected not only his innate ability, but also his exposure - or lack thereof 
- to educational opportunities at home and in school. Regardless of the 
still-raging debate over whether IQ measures nature or nurture, a large body of 
late 20th century research seemed to suggest the scores were, in fact, related 
to criminality. In the widely-cited 1977 paper, "Intelligence and Delinquency: 
A Revisionist Review," Travis Hirschi and Michael Hindelang of the State 
University of New York at Albany cited a number of studies showing that IQ was 
a stronger predictor of juvenile delinquency than a family's socioeconomic 
status. In 1985, criminologists James Q. Wilson and Richard J. Herrnstein 
published "Crime and Human Nature: The Definitive Study of the Causes of 
Crime." Summarizing the IQ research of the period, they wrote that some 
criminals, such as forgers and embezzlers, tended to have higher IQs than the 
larger prison population, but murderers and rapists typically had low IQs. 
Herrnstein went on to co-author, with Charles Murray, "The Bell Curve," the 
1994 book that ignited a firestorm by resurrecting the old argument that some 
racial groups were less intelligent than others.

Meanwhile, more inquiries into the relationship between IQ and lawbreaking had 
appeared. A 1993 longitudinal study of 13-year-old boys showed that those with 
low IQ were more likely to commit crimes in the future, even when the 
researchers controlled for class, race, and motivation to do well on the exam.

These are the types of findings that predominated in the pre-Atkins era. Yet 
newer research complicates the notion of IQ as the most telling link between 
cognitive ability and crime. Measures of self-control, for example, now seem to 
be more reliable than either IQ or class status in predicting whether children 
go on to break the law as adults. The American Association of Intellectual and 
Developmental Disabilities emphasizes that IQ is just one measure of limited 
functioning and identifies other factors, including gullibility and the ability 
to follow directions, use money, or understand a schedule.

Nevertheless, when the Supreme Court ruled against the execution of the 
"mentally retarded" in 2002, many states, including Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, 
Virginia, and Idaho, started using IQ scores as a simple, unambiguous standard.

Even after the court told Florida last May it could not use a single numerical 
cut-off of 70 to prove disability, the confusion surrounding IQ and its 
application in death penalty cases has continued. Often IQ tests conducted by 
experts for the defense and prosecution produce conflicting numbers. IQ scores 
have a 5-point standard of error in either direction, and an individual's score 
can change over time. (Hall's score ranged between 60 and 80 over multiple 
tests. Although Ladd took the Wechsler exam 45 years ago, his score of 67 
figured prominently in his defense team's strategy over the past year.) What is 
considered an average score shifts over time as well.

Additionally, although the court has ruled against a simple numerical cut-off, 
defense attorneys can still use these numbers to argue - particularly in the 
media - against the standards in states that don't use IQ numbers. Even after 
the Hall v. Florida decision, it's up to states to decide how to ascertain 
intellectual disability, and many of these standards are far less friendly to 
defendants than IQ tests; Georgia, which executed Hill this week, demands 
intellectual disability be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." Such a standard 
represents a desire for objective certainty in a realm - the human mind - that 
is endlessly complex and even obfuscated.

And prosecutors are able to exploit that uncertainty when defendants take IQ 
tests after a crime has been committed, since prosecutors can argue that 
defendants are purposefully not doing their best, explained capital defense 
attorney John Blume. "It's pretty hard to overcome the possibility that the 
person might be malingering."

Texas, where Ladd is set to be executed this evening, still relies on the 2004 
court decision Ex Parte Briseno, which said judges could consider a variety of 
factors. These include whether a defendant is able to "hide facts or lie 
effectively," respond to "external stimuli" with "rational and appropriate" 
conduct, and "show leadership." The court left more specific requirements up to 
the state legislature and made a passing reference to Lennie Small, a character 
from John Steinbeck's novella "Of Mice and Men," as someone who might be 
disabled but might also still deserve execution. The author's son, Thomas 
Steinbeck, recently said he wasn't happy about this, and that "the character of 
Lennie was never intended to be used to diagnose a medical condition like 
intellectual disability."

(source: Huffington Post)








US MILITARY:

Forcibly shaven, Fort Hood gunman wants to keep top lawyer



The gunman who killed 13 people at a Texas military base in 2009 appeared in 
court Thursday without the beard he had fought to keep, and said he wanted to 
keep his lead appeals lawyer. Any change of counsel could complicate an already 
delayed review process.

Nidal Hasan attended the hearing at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he is being 
held on the military death row. He no longer has the facial hair he wore during 
his August 2013 trial, where he was convicted and sentenced to death for a 
November 2009 rampage inside a medical readiness building at Fort Hood in 
Central Texas.

A Fort Hood spokesman confirmed Hasan's beard had been forcibly shaved 
according to military guidelines.

Nearly 18 months after his conviction, Hasan has not yet had his case reviewed 
by top Fort Hood officials, as required in the military criminal justice 
system. If Fort Hood's commanding general approves Hasan's death sentence, he 
would then receive two mandatory reviews by military appellate courts and 
possibly the U.S. Supreme Court.

While he represented himself at trial, Hasan's appeals are being handled by a 
team led by Lt. Col. Kris Poppe, who has been named a military judge. In his 
new position, Poppe is subordinate to Col. Tara Osborn, Hasan's trial judge, 
who is now the chief trial judge of the Army.

Osborn on Thursday questioned whether Poppe could keep handling Hasan's 
appeals, a position that requires him to try to find mistakes with Osborn's 
handling of the trial.

"My concern is Maj. Hasan's defense counsel now works for the trial judge," she 
said.

But Hasan told Osborn after conferring with another defense lawyer privately 
that he wanted to keep his counsel in place.

"I do not want you to substitute someone else for Col. Poppe," said Hasan, who 
appeared alert in court and at one point laughed softly with his lawyers during 
a break.

Poppe argued he could handle both positions.

"I believe there's not even a smidgen of concern about full representation of 
Maj. Hasan," he said. "The 2 can be reconciled."

Osborn asked the prosecution and the defense to state their positions in 
writing by next week.

Osborn ordering Poppe off the case could create grounds for a challenge by the 
next attorney to lead Hasan's appeals, said Geoffrey Corn, a military law 
expert who teaches at South Texas College of Law.

Corn said the post-trial process for Hasan was taking much longer than a 
typical military case. But, he added, "That has been the unifying theme of 
everything in this case. Nothing has been routine."

One unordinary hiccup was Hasan's now-shaved beard. Hasan insisted on keeping 
the beard at trial in what he said was an expression of his Muslim faith. The 
judge on his case before Osborn was removed from the case by a military appeals 
court after he tried to order Hasan to be forcibly shaved.

Osborn allowed Hasan to keep the beard despite it violating Army grooming 
rules.

Fort Hood officials did not immediately respond to a request to release a new 
photo of Hasan.

(source: Associated Press)