[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----S.C., FLA., KAN., NEB., CALIF.

[Rick Halperin]

July 31



SOUTH CAROLINA:

Attorney: Roof wants to plead guilty, but waiting for death penalty decision 
from state


The 21-year-old man accused of gunning down nine parishioners at a black church 
in downtown Charleston last month wants to plead guilty to 33 federal charges, 
but his attorney said Friday in court that he wouldn't make that plea until 
prosecutors decide if they will seek the death penalty.

During a brief arraignment in federal court, defense attorney David Bruck said 
that he couldn't advise his client, Dylann Roof, to enter a guilty plea without 
knowing the government's intentions.

"Until we know whether the Government will be asking for the death penalty, we 
are not able to advise Mr. Roof to enter a plea of guilty," Bruck told 
Marchant. "And for that reason, we understand that the Court will enter a plea 
on his behalf."

U.S. Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant then entered a not guilty plea for Roof, 
21, who faces federal charges including hate crimes, weapons charges and 
obstructing the practice of religion.

Appearing in court in a gray striped prison jumpsuit, his hands in shackles, 
Roof answered yes several times in response to the judge's questions but 
otherwise didn't speak.

Family members of the slain victims did speak, however, telling the court their 
feelings.

Wilbur Johnson, the attorney for Emanuel AME, thanked the prosecutors and 
investigators working to build the case. He also said the the AME community 
looked forward to helping in the case as it moves forward to ensure that 
justice is served for the 9 victims and their families.

Tyrone Sanders, Tywanza Sanders' father and Suzie Jackson's nephew, said he was 
deeply hurt and saddened by the shooting and told Roof to take time and think.

I don't know what's going to happen to this young man. I just want him to think 
for the rest of his life, my thoughts towards him and about him. To just think, 
just think, and just continue to think of what I'm thinking about him," Sanders 
said.

Melvin and Malcolm Graham, family members of Cynthia Hurd, said they were there 
to speak for their slain loved one "since she cannot speak for herself."

And Gracyn Doctor, the daughter of Rev. Depayne Middleton-Doctor, told Roof 
that he had taken from her the most precious person in her life.

"But he can't take my joy," she said.

While Bruck has been assigned to Roof's case and has had at least one meeting 
with him, Marchant on Friday made official the assignment by confirming that 
Roof had asked for a pair of defense attorneys be provided by the government.

Moving forward, Bruck and co-counsel Michael O'Connell will represent Roof 
during the federal proceedings.

Bruck has defended high-profile defendants including Boston Marathon bomber 
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was sentenced to death, and Susan Smith, the South 
Carolina mother sentenced to life for drowning her 2 sons.

The state's defense attorneys, Ann Walsh and Bill Nettles, will also remain on 
the case, Marchant added.

Marchant also assigned Judge Richard Gergel to the case. Gergel most recently 
heard arguments on the state's same-sex marriage ban and the Chris Latham 
murder-for-hire case.

No future hearings are scheduled in Roof's case, although the judge did tell 
attorneys they have several weeks to file pre-trial motions.

Roof's federal attorneys declined to comment after the hearing.

Outside the federal courthouse on Broad Street, attorney Eduardo Curry, who is 
representing the church and Rev. Norvel Goff, said the whole AME church is 
watching this case and waiting for justice to be served.

He said going forward they had to make sure that churches are a safe sanctuary 
from violence for black church goers. "We believe this is the beginning of the 
start of that process," he said. "We ask those watching to demand that justice 
be served."

The only sign of emotion from Roof came as the hearing ended when he stood and 
started his shuffle out of the federal courtroom when he took a deep breath. 
His eyes appeared to be red and puffy.

This was Roof's third time inside a Charleston courtroom and his 3rd time 
leaving his cell since he was arrested on June 17. It was back on July 22 that 
a federal grand jury indicted Roof on federal charges.

"For these crimes, Roof faces penalties of up to life imprisonment or the death 
penalty," said Loretta Lynch with the U.S. Department of Justice. "No decision 
has been made on whether to seek the death penalty in this case."

(source: WCIV news)






FLORIDA:

Family's wishes on death penalty should be honored


Listen to victim's family

In a murder case, the state attorney has the unique discretion to seek the 
death penalty. Generally, if the victim's family does not wish to have the 
defendant executed for moral, religious or other reasons, the state attorney 
will honor such wishes. Unfortunately, that is not always the case in 
Jacksonville, and it is the victim's family members who truly suffer when their 
wish for a life sentence for the defendant is ignored.

James Rhodes, the 23-year old Jacksonville man accused of murdering Shelby 
Farrah during a robbery at a Metro-PCS store, was found intellectually 
competent by Judge Tatiana Salvador to face trial and a death sentence if 
convicted.

Shelby Farrah was only 20 years old at the time of the shooting. Her loss is an 
unimaginable tragedy for her family, friends and community.

Nevertheless, in the face of this tragedy, Shelby's family has asked the State 
Attorney's Office not to seek the death penalty but a life sentence instead. 
Shelby's mom stated, "Angela Corey told me if I'd seen everything she saw, I'd 
want the death penalty. But that's not true."

However, her request has been inexplicably ignored.

Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation, a national victim's rights 
organization, has found that capital punishment harms families by complicating 
the grieving process and interfering with healing since death sentences take 
decades to reach finality. In the meantime, families are forced to relive the 
worst moments of their lives and suffer unnecessary trauma that could be 
avoided by replacing the death penalty with life in prison.

A principled ruling in Hurst vs. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court case to be 
heard in 2016 challenging the jury's majority ruling for imposition of the 
death penalty, would distance us from the stench of this legal, moral and 
ethical dilemma.

Judy Thompson, Jacksonville

(source: Letter to the Editor, Florida Times-Union)

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

Rebuilding a life after death row exoneratio


Seth Penalver dropped to the floor and wept into his chair when a Florida jury 
declared him not guilty in the shooting deaths of 3 people during a 1994 home 
invasion.

After 3 trials and 18 years in prison -- including 13 on death row -- a Broward 
County jury in 2012 found Penalver not guilty of capital murder in the 1994 
slayings of Casmir Sucharski, 48, Marie Rogers, 25, and Sharon Anderson, 25.

Little did he know about the struggles that lay ahead. His release from prison 
marked a new chapter, one that's been filled with ups and downs, given his 
prolonged absence from society. Despite his acquittal, he says he struggles to 
find work because of his background, which includes 2 prior nonviolent 
felonies.

"You Google my name and it lights up the screen. I'm 20 years minus a resume, 
so it's hard," he said.

Experts say Penalver's struggles with reintegration are typical for death row 
exonerees or people found to be wrongly convicted. On paper, they're no longer 
offenders -- but they're not quite free of the stigma or psychological impact 
of their incarceration. The duration of their incarceration can strain personal 
relationships, creating a void in support systems after their release. 
Additionally, they often lack access to the same career or counseling services 
available to parolees because technically, they're not on parole.

"The media attention tends to focus on how people got wrongly convicted, what 
in the system led to these cases, and those are important stories worthy of 
attention," said University of North Carolina at Greensboro professor Saundra 
Westervelt, author of "Life After Death Row: Exonerees' Search for Community 
and Identity."

"But the story doesn't end there. There's a slew of practical problems they 
have to figure out how to manage."

The state could help improve prospects for exonerees by providing monetary 
compensation and reintegration services, said Westervelt, a board member of 
Witness to Innocence, which works to abolish the death penalty and provide 
support to former death row inmates.

Only 30 states have laws that provide monetary compensation to wrongly 
convicted people, which can include death row exonerees. And in many states, 
including Florida, they come with limits. In some states, access to monetary 
compensation is available only for people exonerated by DNA evidence, who 
receive an official gubernatorial pardon or who don't have prior felonies.

A crime unfolds on video

Local media dubbed the triple slayings the "Casey's Nickelodeon murders" 
because Sucharski was an owner of Casey's Nickelodeon, a Miramar nightclub 
where he met aspiring models Rogers and Anderson. The three were shot dead in 
Sucharski's home in Miramar, Florida, early in the morning of June 26, 1994.

Penalver and co-defendant Pablo Ibar were charged in the crime after witnesses 
identified them in grainy home surveillance video showing 2 men breaking into 
Sucharski's home. Penalver surrendered to law enforcement in August 1994 after 
a warrant was issued for his arrest.

Penalver stood trial 3 times for the murders. His 1st trial with Ibar in 1997 
ended in a mistrial after the jury deadlocked 10-2 in favor of guilt. The cases 
were severed, and Penalver was tried again in 1999 and sentenced to death on 
charges of murder, attempted robbery and burglary.

The Florida Supreme Court overturned Penalver's verdict in 2006 based on a 
series of evidentiary and constitutional errors related to witness testimony 
and identification. Given the absence of physical evidence connecting Penalver 
to the crime and questions about the identification of the men in the 
surveillance video, "the witnesses' statements presented at trial were of 
paramount importance," the judges wrote in their ruling.

An expert witness who viewed the tape said that he couldn't identify anyone 
from it, but that the person in the video had facial characteristics 
inconsistent with Penalver's facial structure. Some people who knew Penalver 
said the video wasn't him or they couldn't tell. One said she couldn't tell 
from the face, but the subject's gait was like Penalver's. Another told the 
police that it was Penalver, but then testified in court that she couldn't say 
whether it was him or not.

With respect to this last witness, the prosecution argued that she changed her 
testimony after meeting with the defense, improperly suggesting -- with no 
evidence to support it -- that the defense had tampered with her, the court 
found. The court also found that the prosecution improperly admitted hearsay 
testimony that an alternate suspect was out of state, when there was no 
evidence that the suspect was out of state. The prosecution also presented 
evidence implying that Penalver had been suicidal and wrongly used that 
suggestion to imply consciousness of guilt, the court said.

"In light of the scant evidence connecting Penalver to this murder and the 
consequent importance of identifying the individual depicted on the videotape 
in sunglasses and hat, we conclude that the improperly admitted evidence and 
the State's suggestion that the defense tampered with or suborned perjury by an 
identification witness meet the cumulative error requirements outlined above 
and require reversal," the court said in its opinion.

The video magnified the uncertainty, making the strength of the remaining 
evidence all the more important, said Temple University law professor Jules 
Epstein, who specializes in forensics. Appellate courts assess error based on 
the magnitude of the mistakes and their cumulative impact.

"The weaker the rest of the evidence, the more significant the mistakes are. 
Conversely, the stronger the remaining evidence, the impact of mistake goes 
down," Epstein said.

Stepping up for the wrongfully convicted

Penalver says he gets by on odd jobs and government assistance in the form of 
food stamps. He would like to attend school or learn a trade, but living hand 
to mouth makes it impossible to find time or money for education, he said.

Compensation from the state would help, but under the "clean hands" provision 
of Florida's Victims of Wrongful Incarceration Compensation Act, Penalver is 
ineligible because of his two prior nonviolent felonies, which are unrelated to 
the triple slayings he was accused of.

"Just because I had prior felonies in the past, that shouldn't mean I can't be 
compensated for what was done to me," he said. "It's hard getting back on your 
feet; anything would help."

'Death Row Stories': Death, lies and videotape 00:30

Tune in to "Death Row Stories," Sunday at 10 p.m. ET/PT, to learn more about 
the home surveillance that formed the case against Seth Penalver.

(soruce: CNN)






KANSAS:

AG Schmidt to ask U.S. Supreme Court to review 3 Kansas cases


The Kansas attorney general is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review 3 recent 
decisions that overturned convictions or sentences in Kansas criminal cases - 
including 1 in Sedgwick County.

In June the state's high court said it was unconstitutional and "cruel and 
unusual punishment" to impose lifetime parole on a juvenile convicted of 
aggravated indecent liberties with a child. The ruling stemmed from the case of 
Bryce Dull, who pleaded guilty to a 2009 sexual assault on a 13-year-old 
committed when he was 17, and was sentenced to 45 months in prison on the 
charge, as well as lifetime supervision after his release.

The post-release term means, among sanctions, that Dull would have to register 
as a sex offender and report to a parole officer for life and could go back to 
prison for the rest of his life if convicted of a new crime.

In an e-mail Wednesday, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt announced his 
intention to seek a review of the case by the nation's high court.

He also will ask for a review of a 10th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that 
vacated Kimberly Sharp's murder conviction in the 2006 killing of David Owens 
in Topeka, and of a Kansas Supreme Court ruling that overturned Luis Aguirre's 
capital murder conviction in the 2009 deaths of Tanya and Juan Maldonado in 
Riley County.

Schmidt, in his announcement, said he is "unsure the correct legal conclusion 
was reached under the applicable principles of federal law, so we are 
requesting review."

Kansas now has 3 cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, he said.

Oral arguments are expected in October in the death penalty cases of brothers 
Jonathan and Reginald Carr, who killed 5 Wichitans during a multi-day crime 
spree in 2000, and of Sidney Gleason, who was convicted of killing a couple in 
Great Bend in 2004. Death sentences for the 3 men were struck down by the 
Kansas Supreme Court last year.

The U.S. Supreme Court grants only about 1 % of requests it receives to review 
lower-court decisions, Schmidt said.

(source: The Wichita Eagle)






NEBRASKA:

Nebraska governor again donates to death penalty cause


True to his word, Gov. Pete Ricketts has again donated to a group trying to 
save Nebraska's death penalty.

A monthly financial statement released Friday by Nebraskans for the Death 
Penalty shows Ricketts donated $100,000 in the last month. That matches his 
$100,000 donation last month, for a total of $200,000.

In all, the group raised nearly $400,000 in cash for July. The largest donation 
came from the conservative, Washington-based Judicial Crisis Network, which 
gave $200,000.

Nebraskans for the Death Penalty is overseeing a petition drive to put the 
death penalty question on the 2016 ballot. That effort began after Nebraska 
lawmakers abolished the death penalty last spring despite the governor's veto. 
Death penalty opponents have launched their own campaign, Nebraskans for Public 
Safety, urging voters not to sign.

(source: Associated Press)






CALIFORNIA:

Orange County Judge Pans Lawyers' Theatrics In Gruesome Death Penalty Case


Saying he is "shocked" by "ad hominem" attacks, a veteran Orange County 
Superior Court judge today lectured a prosecutor and defense lawyer in People 
v. Daniel Wozniak, a pending death penalty case.

Homicide prosecutor Matt Murphy and Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders are 
tireless, gifted legal advocates, but they also despise one other--a sentiment 
neither has masked for 18 months of courthouse bickering that's gotten 
personal.

Murphy says Sanders is rude, obnoxious and a chronic, empty accuser of 
prosecutorial misconduct. He thinks his adversary purposely blocked his 2014 
Christmas vacation. Sanders says Murphy is a cheap-shot artist and reckless 
defender of unethical law enforcement conduct. He thinks the prosecutor can't 
be trust to surrender exculpatory evidence. Both agree, however, the other 
isn't fit to handle such a high stakes case.

"He's a hypocrite," Murphy declared today.

Sanders said the prosecutor hoped to "poison the court" against the defense by 
repeatedly labeling him "a bad evil-doer."

The Republican-controlled Congress actually may get along better with President 
Barack Obama.

Tensions only flared after Sanders' partial, March victory in a separate death 
penalty case, People v. Scott Dekraai, where a judge recused Dan Wagner, 
Murphy's boss and close friend, after numerous ethical blunders were 
discovered.

Earlier this year, the Murphy/Sanders insults prompted Judge James Stotler to 
recuse himself after admitting he held a passionate bias against the public 
defender.

Conley--a former prosecutor known for a steady, no-nonsense disposition--now 
presides for the case's penalty phase and listened quietly for nearly an hour 
this morning to Round 127 in the slug-fest before opining.

"This is just child's play," the judge said tersely. "Personal dislikes of each 
other have taken over the case."

He then summarized the position he says the lawyers espouse: "He's a jerk. I 
don't like him and I don't trust him."

Conley left the topic for about 10 minutes to deny Sanders' request to recuse 
Murphy and his office colleagues, but returned to add an additional description 
for the conduct of "both" lawyers: "Beginners' horseplay."

Wozniak, a local theater actor, could face the death penalty for the May 2010 
robbery and decapitation murder of Samuel Herr, 26, at the Los Alamitos 
military base followed by the execution of 23-year-old Juri "Julie" Kibuishi in 
Costa Mesa near Orange Coast College.

Wozniak has pleaded guilty and is willing to accept life in prison without the 
possibility of parole. Murphy wants the death penalty imposed. A future jury 
will receive evidence to help determine the outcome.

Relatives of the 2 victims attend each court hearing and vocally urge a final 
resolution in the 5-year-old case.

Producers for national television news outlets are preparing broadcasts on the 
crimes.

(source: Orange County Weekly)