[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., PENN., VA., OHIO, ARK., MO.

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 10



CONNECTICUT:

Chief State's Attorney Asks Conn. Supreme Court to Reconsider Death Penalty 
Ruling


The state's top prosecutor wants the Connecticut Supreme Court to reconsider 
its recent landmark decision to completely eliminate the death penalty in the 
state.

Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane and his office have filed a motion for 
argument and motions to strike the 4-3 decision in State v. Santiago. "The 
majority opinion, along with the concurring opinion of two justices, addresses 
issues, undertakes analysis and relies on materials that were never raised or 
presented by the defendant, and never subjected to any adversarial inquiry," 
Kane's motion for argument states.

The legislature in 2012 repealed the death penalty for future murder cases, but 
kept it for those already on death row. In August, the Supreme Court found the 
retroactive application of the death penalty unconstitutional, meaning the 11 
men on death row no longer faced execution.

Kane's office, which heads the Division of Criminal Justice, notes in its 
motion that it recognizes the complex legal and policy issues the Supreme Court 
confronted, and the legitimate opinions on both sides of the debate. "But the 
process the majority followed in reaching its conclusion deprived the division 
of the opportunity to address the concerns that drove the results, and led the 
majority, unaided by the time-tested adversarial process, to inaccurate 
assumptions and errors of law," Kane wrote.

He said the majority of justices unfairly denied the division the right to be 
heard. "There is much to debate in the majority opinion," the motion said. "And 
it is clear that the court itself engaged in that debate. However, the Division 
of Criminal Justice, which represents the people of Connecticut, also deserves 
an opportunity to engage in that debate through supplemental briefing and 
argument."

The motion asserts that argument is warranted "for the simple reason that the 
majority has been unfair to the state."

"It also is necessary because, without the state's input, the majority made 
several legal and logical errors and misinterpreted the constitutional history 
it decided to explore," the motion claimed.

Kane claims the majority misunderstood the state's constitutional history 
regarding the court's role in protecting against cruel and unusual punishment. 
The court has previously stated it could not abolish the death penalty because 
it is "an inherently legislative determination," the motion said.

Kane's motion also alleges the majority disregarded assurances that many state 
lawmakers relied on when they voted to eliminate the death penalty for future 
cases. When the death penalty abolition bill was debated, a number of 
legislators said they would not approve it if it meant sparing the lives of the 
two men found guilty of the 2007 Cheshire home invasion murders.

"The majority failed to accord the proper respect for the legislature's express 
intent, and instead disregarded its prior assurance that the Court does not 
consider prospective repeal to be a rejection of capital punishment," the 
motion said. "Legislators justifiably could and should conclude that they were 
deceived."

Debating Delays

Chief Justice Chase Rogers used much the same language in her dissent in 
Santiago. "In making this determination" to spare the lives of those on death 
row, Rogers wrote, "the majority disregards the obvious: the legislature, which 
represents the people of the state and is the best indicator of contemporary 
societal mores, expressly retained the death penalty for crimes committed 
before the effective date" of the prospective repeal.

The Division of Criminal Justice also wants a chance to present an argument on 
the issue of whether the delay in executions renders the death penalty 
unconstitutional. The division wrote in its motion that this view "turns on its 
head the accepted proposition that a robust appellate procedure is vital to 
shield inmates from improper death sentences."

Connecticut has executed just one inmate since 1960, serial killer Michael 
Ross, who decided to end further appeals and was put to death in 2005.

On the issue of the possibility of executing the innocent, Kane wrote, "Of the 
11 men presently on Connecticut's death row, not a single one of them is 
anything but guilty."

Kane also asserted there is no evidence to support the claim that the system is 
permeated by racial bias. Kane submitted motions to strike portions of the 
majority and concurring opinions that dealt with racial bias as justification 
for invalidating Connecticut's death penalty. Kane asserted the issue of racial 
bias wasn't before this panel in Santiago, and instead is properly pending 
before the court in another case, In re: Claims of Racial Disparity in Death 
Penalty Cases.

"There is no factual record in this [Santiago] case from which the majority can 
determine if the present residents of death row were sentenced under a process 
that is racially biased," Kane wrote.

Assistant Public Defender Mark Rademacher said on Sept. 9 his office is 
drafting and preparing to submit a response to the Division of Criminal 
Justice's motion for argument. Rademacher asserted the issues mentioned in the 
motion have all been considered by the court's justices.

"There is no point to rehashing what they decided," Rademacher said. "The state 
has nothing new to say. It is a half-hearted attempt to change the vote. This 
motion doesn't offer any new reasons that would get the court to reconsider its 
decision. To get a chance for a new argument, you have to offer a new reason 
that would change the court's mind."

Rademacher said he doesn't plan to respond to the division's motions to strike. 
"It is inappropriate to tell the justices they shouldn't discuss race," 
Rademacher said.

The attorneys said they expect the court to decide later this month whether it 
will reconsider the death penalty ruling.

(source: Connecticut Law Tribune)






PENNSYLVANIA:

Pennsylvania Supreme Court takes up the death penalty moratorium case this week


A legal battle over Governor Tom Wolf's 7-month-old death penalty moratorium 
lands in Pennsylvania's state's Supreme Court Thursday.

The court's ruling could disrupt Wolf's plans to continue issuing reprieves to 
death row inmates -- at least until a task force finishes studying capital 
punishment in Pennsylvania.

The governor's 1st reprieve came in February for inmate Terrance Williams, 
sentenced to death for killing a man in 1984.

The Philadelphia District Attorney's office said reprieves can't be open-ended 
rulings absent any consideration of the inmate, but the governor said his 
actions are supported by the constitution and history.

Bruce Ledewitz, a professor at Duquesne University School of Law, has said case 
law requires a reprieve to be for a definite time and purpose. "The question is 
whether the reprieve has something to do with the particular prisoner who gets 
the reprieve," he said.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Philadelphia.

(source: newsworks.org)

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

State's high court to weigh Wolf's death-penalty moratorium


The constitutionality of Gov. Tom Wolf's death-penalty moratorium is the focus 
of a hearing before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams challenged the moratorium only 
days after Wolf announced it in February. Lawyers will make oral arguments 
Thursday in Philadelphia.

Wolf has granted reprieves for three death-row prisoners as part of an effort 
to block executions until a legislative panel completes a study of capital 
punishment. His lawyers argue that the state constitution gives the governor 
unconditional power to grant reprieves.

Williams contends that the moratorium is unconstitutional and amounts to the 
improper use of a reprieve to achieve the indefinite suspension of a death 
sentence.

The case involves Terrance Williams, whose scheduled execution in March for a 
1984 killing was canceled by Wolf's 1st reprieve.

(source: Associated Press)






VIRGINIA----impendingn execution//foreign national

Virginia Gives Alfredo Prieto Execution Date of October 1, 2015


Alfredo Rolando Prieto is scheduled to be executed at 9 pm EDT, on Thursday, 
October 1, 2015, at the Greenville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Virginia. 
49-year-old Alfredo has been sentenced to death for the rape and murder of 
22-year-old Rachel A. Raver and the murder of 22-year-old Warren H. Fulton, 
III, last seen alive on December 4, 1988. Their bodies were discovered 2 days 
later in Fairfax, Virginia. Alfredo has spent the last 7 years on Virginia's 
death row.

Alfredo was born and spent part of his childhood in El Salvador, which was in 
the midst of a civil war. By the time Alfredo was a teenager, he and his family 
were living in California, where Alfredo became a member of the Pomona 
Northside gang.

On December 4, 1988, 2 Georgetown University students, Rachel Raver and Warren 
Fulton were seen leaving a local restaurant in Washington, DC. 2 days later, 
their bodies were discovered in a deserted area near Reston, Virginia. 
Investigators determined that Warren had been shot in the back of head and 
Rachel was shot while trying to escape. As she lay bleeding to death, Prieto 
raped her. Prieto escaped to California.

In 1990, 15-year-old Yvette Woodruff was raped and murdered in Ontario, 
California. Prieto was charged and convicted with her murder, receiving a death 
sentence in 1992. While in prison in California, Prieto's DNA was entered into 
a national database and, in 2005, matched a cold case in Virginia: the rape and 
murder of Rachel and the murder of Warren. Prieto was extradited to Virginia to 
stand trial, where he was given 2 death sentences, along with various prison 
terms for charges related to the murders.

Through DNA evidence, Prieto has also been linked to the rape and murder of 
24-year-old Veronica "Tina" Jefferson in Arlington, Virginia in May of 1988; 
the murder of 27-year-old Manuel F. Sermeno in Prince William County, Virginia 
in September of 1989; the rape and murder of 19-year-old Stacey Siegrist and 
the murder of 21-year-old Tony Gianuzzi in Riverside County, California in the 
spring of 1990; and the murder of 71-year-old Lula Farley and 65-year-old 
Herbert Farley, which also occurred in the spring of 1990, in Riverside County, 
California. Ballistic evidence also linked several of the crime.

Attorneys for Prieto attempted to argue that he was mentally retarded and 
ineligible for the death penalty. They blamed Prieto???s upbringing war-torn El 
Salvador for his retardation. Neither the courts nor juries have found the 
claims to have merit.

Please pray for peace and healing for the families of Rachel Raver, Warren 
Fulton, Tina Jefferson, Manuel Sermeno, Stacey Siegrist, Tony Gianuzzi, and 
Herbert and Lula Farley. Please pray for strength for the family of Alfredo 
Prieto. Please pray that Alfredo may come to find peace through a personal 
relationship with Jesus Christ, if he has not already found one.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org.)






OHIO:

Judge rejects death row inmate's request for new trial


A judge overruled the request for a new trial by a man sent to Ohio's death row 
for his role in the 2002 execution-style killings of 2 girls in an Eureka 
Street apartment.

Judge David Cheney ruled against Jeronique Cunningham's request for a new trial 
based on allegations of juror misconduct. Cunningham, now 42, accused the 
forewoman of his jury of bias saying she had prior knowledge of him or the 
victim's family, which she used to influence the decision of other jurors.

Allen County Prosecutor Juergen Waldick was happy with the decision but said 
it's just part of "the appellate process that seems to never end in death 
penalty cases."

The case goes back to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals which sent it back to 
state court to consider the matter. That court now will consider a further 
appeal, Waldick said.

Cunningham and his half-brother, Cleveland Jackson, were convicted in the 
killings of Jala Grant, 3, and Leneshia Williams, 17, and the wounding of 6 
others in the Eureka Street apartment. 6 of the 8 victims were shot in the 
head. Both men were sentenced to death. The motive for the crime was to achieve 
drugs and money.

A prosecutor argued Cunningham's motion was filed more than a decade late but 
regardless she said there was no juror misconduct and even if there had been, 5 
witnesses at trial pointed to Cunningham as the man who carried out the 
executions.

Cunningham's attorney, Michael Benza, said he was not given the chance to 
question the forewoman. He said she was an investigator at Allen County 
Children Services and had knowledge of Cunningham or the victims that 
influenced her, and prevented Cunningham from getting a fair trial.

But Assistant Allen County Prosecutor Jana Emerick said that was not the case. 
She said the forewoman was questioned extensively during jury selection about 
her employment and whether she had any knowledge of the case or parties 
involved that would prevent her from being a fair and impartial juror. She said 
she did not, Emerick said.

When the juror had been questioned, she said she was not influenced ahead of 
the trial and anything she learned about Cunningham came after the trial when 
she reviewed agency records, Emerick said.

But Benza said another juror stated in a deposition said the forewoman said she 
had to work in the community and see the families of the victims after the 
trial, and used that to influence the opinion of at least 1 other juror.

Emerick said the statement was taken out of context.

Jackson has exhausted his appeals. His final chance at avoiding execution is 
through clemency, which a hearing has not been scheduled. Jackson has a July 
20, execution date set.

(source: limaohio.com)






ARKANSAS:

Arkansas set to resume executions after 10-year hiatus


The US state of Arkansas is set to resume executing death row inmates after a 
10-year hiatus brought on by legal concerns and drug shortages.

Governor Asa Hutchinson on Wednesday set the execution dates for 8 men.

On 21 October, 2 inmates are scheduled to die by the state's lethal 3-drug 
cocktail, which includes the controversial drug midazolam.

Executions in the US have been delayed recently amid problems buying drugs as 
many firms have refused to sell them.

27 people have been executed in Arkansas since 1976 when the US Supreme Court 
reintroduced the death penalty.

The dates were set following the request last week of Attorney General Leslie 
Rutledge.

She sent letters to the governor telling him that the condemned inmates had run 
out of appeals options and that state officials had acquired enough of the 
needed drugs to carry out the punishments.

The state still faces 1 lawsuit that challenges a new law that allows the state 
to conceal how it obtains the lethal drugs needed to perform the execution 
procedure.

However, the US Supreme Court and other federal courts have rejected similar 
challenges in other states.

Lawyer Jeff Rosenzweig represents the e8 condemned inmates as well as a 9th 
individual whose case is still in the appeals process.

Mr Rosenzweig has said that he plans to file for the executions to be delayed.

On 1 July, the state's Department of Correction said it had enough of the 
lethal drugs it needed to perform the executions.

Its stockpiles include a sufficient supply of midazolam, which has been 
criticized since executions last year in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma did not go 
as planned.

In June, the US Supreme court approved the drug for continued use when it 
rejected a challenge from 3 Oklahoma death-row inmates.

(source: BBC news)






MISSOURI----new execution date

Execution set for man convicted in 1994 Columbia triple slaying


The Missouri Supreme Court has scheduled a November execution for an inmate 
convicted of killing 3 workers at a Columbia convenience store more than 2 
decades ago.

The state's high court issued the execution order Tuesday for 55-year-old 
Ernest Lee Johnson, scheduling his death by injection for Nov. 3.

Johnson was convicted of bludgeoning 46-year-old Mary Bratcher, 57-year-old 
Mable Scruggs and 58-year-old Fred Jones with a hammer at a Casey's General 
Store where they worked in Boone County. The killings took place in February 
1994.

This execution order marks the beginning of the end of the decades-long legal 
process. Johnson was sentenced to death for the 1st time in 1995 on all 3 
murder charges.

The Missouri Supreme Court granted a retrial after an initial appeal from 
Johnson's defense team. His death sentences were re-imposed in 2003, but a 2nd 
appeal and subsequent retrial put them on hold again.

Johnson's legal defenders argued in their appeals that Johnson was mentally 
disabled, a factor that defense team members said was not adequately presented 
in court in the initial trial. In the appeals, they said his mental state 
should have precluded him from the death penalty, according to previous 
Missourian reporting.

The Missouri Supreme Court based the decisions to grant retrials on the defense 
team's arguments, as well as a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in which justices 
decided executing mentally disabled people was cruel and unusual punishment.

In 2008, the Missouri Supreme Court returned Johnson to death row despite a 
third appeal, according to previous Missourian reporting.

6 murder convicts have been executed in Missouri this year. Missouri tied Texas 
for the state with the highest number of executions in 2014 with 10 lethal 
injections, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

(source: Associated Press)