[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., WYO., NEV., ARIZ., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 23




OKLAHOMA----impending execution

Oklahoma death row inmate challenges new execution date


Attorneys for an Oklahoma inmate scheduled to be put to death next week 
challenged his execution date Tuesday in a motion that claims a court order 
that set it violates state law.

Richard Glossip, 52, was given a Sept. 30 execution date in an order handed 
down by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals when it set aside his previous 
execution date and gave him a 2-week reprieve. Glossip's motion asks the 
appeals court to rescind the portion of its order that set his new execution 
date.

Glossip was just hours away from being given a lethal injection on Sept. 16 for 
arranging the 1997 beating death of motel owner Barry Alan Van Treese when the 
appeals court halted the punishment. The court wanted to give judges more time 
to review Glossip's lengthy death penalty challenge in which he claims he is 
innocent.

The appeals court granted an emergency stay of execution in the order that 
reset Glossip's execution "without further order" of the court. But Glossip's 
motion says state law requires that "a new execution date cannot be set before 
a stay is dissolved."

The motion states that once a stay of execution is lifted by the court, state 
law requires a new execution date to be set for either 30 or 60 days later, not 
just 14 days as in Glossip's case.

"Following the statute would permit an orderly presentation and evaluation of 
claims," the motion concludes.

Aaron Cooper, a spokesman for Attorney General Scott Pruitt, said Pruitt plans 
to file legal papers in support of the court's order.

"The attorney general believes the court's actions were entirely consistent 
with the law," Cooper said.

Glossip was twice convicted of ordering the killing of Van Treese, who lived in 
Lawton and owned the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. Prosecutors said 
Justin Sneed, a motel handyman, admitted robbing and beating Van Treese, but 
said he did so only after Glossip promised to pay him $10,000.

Van Treese was found beaten to death Jan. 7, 1997, in a room at the motel. Van 
Treese was staying at the motel while delivering paychecks and picking up large 
amounts of money for deposit.

Glossip was questioned by police, and a day later began selling his belongings 
and telling people he was leaving town, according to investigators. Police 
again detained him and found him with $1,200; court records show his net pay 
that week was about $430. Sneed was found with $1,700 after Van Treese's death.

Glossip's case attracted international attention after actress Susan Sarandon, 
who portrayed nun and death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean in the movie 
"Dead Man Walking," took up his cause. Prejean has served as Glossip's 
spiritual adviser and frequently visited him in prison.

Had it not been halted, Glossip's execution would have been the first in 
Oklahoma since a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state's 3-drug 
lethal injection formula in June.

(source: Associated Press)






WYOMING:

Casper judge sets hearing in round 2 of Eaton death case


Convicted murderer Dale Wayne Eaton is set to appear Wednesday before a state 
judge in Casper.

District Judge Daniel Forgey has ordered Eaton transported from the state 
prison in Rawlins. Prosecutors are asking Forgey to require Eaton undergo an 
evaluation at the state hospital in Evanston to see if he's competent to face a 
new death penalty hearing.

A federal judge last year overturned Eaton's original death sentence in the 
1988 murder of Lisa Kimmell of Billings, Montana, ruling he didn't receive an 
adequate defense.

Eaton's lawyers are appealing the judge's ruling that the state could pursue 
the death penalty against him again.

Casper District Attorney Mike Blonigen says the federal courts could block a 
2nd death penalty hearing, but says his office meanwhile has the responsibility 
to move forward.

(source: Associated Press)






NEVADA:

Death-penalty trial begins over 2010 slaying of US airman from Guam


A death penalty trial has begun in Las Vegas for a Nevada ex-convict accused of 
plotting with his girlfriend the ambush slaying of her husband, a U.S. Air 
Force servicemember and Iraq War veteran from Guam.

Michael Rudolph Rodriguez, 36, waited outside the couple's southeast Las Vegas 
home and shot Staff Sgt. Nathan Paet 5 times as Paet headed to work at Nellis 
Air Force Base, Nev., late Dec. 1, 2010, prosecutor Frank Coumou told a jury 
during opening arguments Monday.

Police said Paet, wearing his camouflage uniform, was shot several times in the 
back before stumbling from his garage into his home and collapsing in front of 
his wife, Michelle Antwanette Paet, and their four children. He died later at a 
hospital.

Coumou told jurors that Michelle Paet had alerted Rodriguez by text message 
when her husband was leaving the house. "He's rushing to get out the door. 
Lol," one message said.

Michelle Paet, now 33, is scheduled for trial later this month. 2 
co-defendants, Jessica Ashley and Corry Hawkins, also await trial. Each has 
pleaded not guilty to conspiracy, murder and burglary with a weapon.

Neighbors reported seeing a black Cadillac leave the scene of the shooting, and 
police said a witness told them that Rodriguez went to Ashley and Hawkins' 
apartment and burned his clothes in their fireplace.

Rodriguez's attorney, Alzora Jackson, told the Clark County District Court jury 
that Rodriguez had nothing to gain from killing Nathan Paet. But police 
reported that Michelle Paet stood to receive $400,000 from the military, and 
she took out another $250,000 life insurance policy on her husband.

Police said Michelle Paet told investigators that she and Rodriguez began 
planning the slaying in October 2010, and they planned to be together 
afterward.

Nathan Paet was an F-15 supply technician with the 757th Aircraft Maintenance 
Squadron. He and Michelle Paet were high school sweethearts. He joined the Air 
Force in 2002. The couple married in 2006.

Rodriguez, a 2-time felon convicted of attempted forgery charges in 2007 and 
2008, worked with Michelle Paet at a telemarketing company in Las Vegas, 
according to arrest records.

Rodriguez told police he was having sex with another woman at a Las Vegas 
casino-hotel at the time of the shooting. But that woman told police that 
Rodriguez asked her to be his alibi and told her he was set to receive up to 
$5,000 for the killing.

(source: Stars and Stripes)



ARIZONA:

Prosecutors to seek death penalty against Mesa QT murder suspect Apolinar 
Altamirano


Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty against the undocumented immigrant 
charged with the murder of a Mesa gas station clerk.

Video evidence from the January incident shows Apolinar Altamirano, 30, shoot 
Grant Ronnebeck in the head inside the Quik Trip near Stapley Drive and 
Broadway Road, according to court documents.

One reason Altamirano shot Ronnebeck, 21, was to make a financial gain, in this 
case 2 boxes of cigarettes, according to documents filed by the Maricopa County 
Attorney's Office.

Altamirano pleaded not guilty to the charges against him.

He was awaiting deportation proceedings when he allegedly shot Ronnebeck, 
according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

A representative of the Mexican government has appeared at several of 
Altamirano's hearings, records show.

Aggravating factors that allow the prosecution to seek the death penalty 
include the "especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner" of the crime and 
that Altamirano gained financially from the crime (by taking the cigarettes), 
according to the prosecution's filing.

Altamirano is at least the second undocumented immigrant arrested in Maricopa 
County this year who could face the death penalty if convicted of 1st-degree 
murder. Prosecutors also put Carlos Cruz on notice that they intend to seek the 
death penalty if he is convicted. Cruz is accused of murdering his 3-year-old 
daughter in Surprise in May. He pleaded not guilty.

3 undocumented immigrants are on death row in Arizona, according to the Death 
Penalty Information Center.

(source: ABC news)






OREGON:

Gov. Brown should set a date for death-penalty decision


When you're taking over for a disgraced governor who skipped town in a hurry, 
changing the state's Constitution isn't necessarily first on your to-do list. 
Which is why it made perfect sense for Gov. Kate Brown to temporarily extend 
the moratorium on executions imposed by former Gov. John Kitzhaber in 2011.

But Brown should avoid the trap of complacency that Kitzhaber fell into. While 
the former governor deserves credit for his stand against a system he rightly 
described as compromised, inequitable and costly, he failed to accomplish 
anything more. The statewide debate to find alternatives to the death penalty 
that Kitzhaber initially called for never materialized - due largely to his 
failure to push for it. Oregon's death row remains as active as ever, with 
limited state and local dollars funding the prosecution, defense and appeals of 
inmates who will face the death penalty in name only.

Brown is beginning to address the question of what to do about Oregon's death 
penalty, according to The Oregonian/OregonLive's Denis C. Theriault. She 
acknowledges the many aspects of the complex, emotional issue - including the 
logistical challenges of simply obtaining the drugs necessary to carry out 
lethal injection. But, she, like Kitzhaber, has done little to move the 
conversation along. And unlike Kitzhaber, who announced his moratorium and 
issued a reprieve to stop the execution of 2-time killer Gary Haugen, Brown 
faces no pressing deadlines of an impending death sentence being carried out. 
Haugen, who volunteered for execution in 2011 as a protest of the legal system, 
is himself taking a different tack. He seeks to challenge his conviction and 
sentence.

Brown should match Kitzhaber's momentary show of bold leadership with one of 
her own. She should set a deadline prior to the start of the 2016 legislative 
session by which her advisers conclude their review of the death penalty 
system. And then she should either lift the moratorium or work with legislators 
to refer a measure to the November 2016 ballot asking voters to amend the 
Constitution and abolish the death penalty.

The governor has a willing legislator in Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, who 
has been among the few voices in government pushing this issue in front of 
legislators and the public, sponsoring a bill that has gone nowhere, without 
the influence of the governor.

It's time to stop this "we-really-should-have-a-discussion" rhetoric and really 
have the discussion. Attitudes - and the voter base - have changed from 1984, 
when voters agreed to amend the Constitution to include capital punishment as 
an option for those convicted of aggravated murder. But since then, only 2 
people - both volunteers who waived their rights to appeal - have been 
executed: Douglas Franklin Wright in 1996 and Harry Charles Moore in 1997. For 
too long, Oregonians have been underwriting all the costs of a 
capital-punishment system without actually having one. How does this make 
sense? It doesn't.

The death penalty, whether leaders agree with it or not, is a lawful punishment 
under the Oregon Constitution. Our elected officials are entrusted to follow 
and carry out the law. If they believe in the need for change, then they should 
lead the way.

Kitzhaber did Oregon a great service in calling attention to a problem that has 
gone unaddressed for decades. But he ultimately accomplished nothing. It's up 
to Brown to avoid his mistake of confusing the act of identifying a problem 
with the act of solving it.

(source: The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board)






USA:

4 People Who Changed Their Mind About the Death Penalty


This year, a Pew Research Center poll found that support for the death penalty 
is at its lowest rate in 40 years. Down by more than 20 % from just 2 decades 
ago, that means a lot of people are changing their minds on capital punishment.

It's not just average Americans who are switching their stances. Governors, 
Supreme Court justices and even state executioners - people who are arguably 
the most influential when it comes to the death penalty - are also having 
changes of heart. Here are 4 of the most high-profile examples:

1. Former Texas Governor Mark White

As the governor of Texas for 4 years in the 1980s, White oversaw 19 executions. 
He even made his willingness to execute people a talking point in his 
reelection campaign, knowing that was popular with constituents.

Because of his experience and position, White was asked to join the 
Constitution Project, a bipartisan think tank, to represent the pro-death 
penalty side of this contentious issue. As he conducted research to bolster his 
own opinion, however, he realized how biased the process is and how many 
innocent people have been put to death for crimes they most likely did not 
commit. While he still doesn't think that sentencing the most atrocious 
criminals to death is immoral, he no longer supports the death penalty as it 
stands. "Human life is too precious, and human error too prevalent, to continue 
to gamble with a system that we know is so flawed," said White.

2. Virginia Executioner Jerry Givens

For 17 years, Givens served as Virginia's chief executioner, during which time 
he carried out 62 executions - most by electric chair, others by lethal 
injection. Givens would read up on each of the inmates' crimes so he could 
justify having to kill them. Then, just days before he was scheduled to execute 
Earl Washington, a mentally disabled man convicted of rape and murder, the 
state found DNA evidence that exonerated the man. Realizing that he was close 
to killing an innocent man, Givens' confidence in the death penalty was shaken.

Those doubts continued when Givens was convicted of money laundering in 1999. 
Though Givens maintains his innocence to this day, he served 4 years in prison 
and says he learned a valuable lesson about how imperfect the justice system 
can be. He now regularly speaks out against capital punishment, arguing to 
legislators that it's easy for them to decide to allow the death penalty when 
they aren't the ones tasked with actually taking the lives.

3. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper

When Hickenlooper first ran for governor, he probably didn't realize how much 
of an important issue capital punishment would become. In 2010, the Democrat 
stated his support for the death penalty, an easy stance to take since the 
state hadn't executed anyone in over a decade. He later supported this opinion 
with a threat to veto potential legislation that would repeal capital 
punishment in Colorado.

Things got serious when Nathan Dunlap, a man convicted of murdering 4 people, 
had his execution approaching during Hickenlooper's re-election campaign. At 
that point, the governor declared that he changed his mind and no longer 
supported the death penalty. In order to prevent Dunlap's execution, he 
indefinitely stayed it. Many pundits have called out Hickenlooper for his 
"wimpy" flip flopping, but if he really did switch his opinion on the matter to 
gain political traction with voters, then at least he's listening to the will 
of his constituents on this particular matter.

4. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Early in her career, Justice Ginsburg did not take a firm stance on the death 
penalty, indicating that she supported it in some cases. Over the years, 
however, her position has clearly evolved. She thinks that most people who get 
the death penalty, regardless of their guilt, are those with the worst 
representation at trial. "I have yet to see a death case among the dozens 
coming to the Supreme Court on eve-of-execution stay applications in which the 
defendant was well represented at trial," she said.

Recently, Ginsburg has indicated that she thinks capital punishment could very 
well be considered unconstitutional. However, at this point, she is unwilling 
to take a hard no on all death penalty cases like a handful of previous 
justices so that she can participate in the deliberations and have a say in 
death penalty cases that make it to the Supreme Court.

(source: care2.com)