[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., ALA., LA., KY., UTAH, CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 26


FLORIDA:

Death penalty changes may affect Palmetto murder case


It was a Monday night in September at a Palmetto convenience store called 
Snappy's Mart, when Devin Chandler allegedly walked into the store, grabbed a 
few items, and then fatally shooting the 2 men behind the counter.

The 2 cashiers were brothers, 23-year-old Khasem Yousef and 17-year-old Manatee 
High student, Faares Yousef.

Robert Gonzales owns the auto body shop next door. He knew the Yousef brothers, 
and says the man behind the killings deserves to die.

"He should get the death penalty," Gonzales said. "He broke the law."

But the death penalty may not be an option, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 
Florida's death penalty sentencing system unconstitutional, because it leaves 
too much power in the hands of a judge and not enough in the hands of a jury.

In court Wednesday, Chandler's lawyer submitted a motion arguing that the state 
should not be allowed to seek the death penalty in this case, but the judge 
referenced a 1977 Supreme Court case, suggesting that the death penalty may 
still be on the table.

ACLU attorney Adam Tebrugge has dealt with many death penalty cases. He sides 
with Chandler's lawyer, saying unconstitutional means unconstitutional.

"There is only one lawful sentence that could be imposed if he were to plead 
guilty," said Tebrugge, "and that sentence is life imprisonment without 
possibility of parole."

Tebrugge says that's the fastest and fairest solution in this case.

"The state attorney ought to agree to sentence Mr. Chandler to a life sentence 
and be done with the case and save the tax payer millions of dollars," said 
Tebrugge. "And dragging this case out for decades when there's a possible 
resolution on the table right here and now that will end it in a just and fair 
manner."

(source: WWSB news)






ALABAMA:

Death penalty case moved to September for man charged with stabbing elderly 
church volunteers


A Huntsville man charged with killing 2 elderly brothers in a Huntsville church 
food bank in May 2013 had his trial date moved back from April to September 
during a hearing Friday morning.

Richard Burgin, 52, is charged with fatally stabbing Anthony Jackson, 76, and 
Terry Jackson, 69, inside the food pantry at West Huntsville United Methodist 
Church.

The brothers were church volunteers who helped distribute food and did cleanup 
work at the pantry. Terry cared for Anthony, who had cerebral palsy.

The state is seeking the death penalty for Burgin.

Burgin was arrested several months after the killings. He was in custody at 
Draper Correctional Facility when a state DNA database matched his DNA to DNA 
found on a cup near the crime scene, according to the Huntsville Police 
Department.

Burgin's attorneys Chad Morgan and Larry Marsili said this morning that neither 
side is to blame for the case being continued. Morgan said they are still 
awaiting DNA results and fingerprint analysis related to the crime scene.

Madison County Assistant District Attorney Randy Dill is prosecuting the case 
with Assistant District Jay Town.

The case is being heard by Madison County Circuit Judge Karen Hall.

(source: WHNT news)






LOUISIANA:

Plea spares Louisiana cop's killer a death sentence


The St. Landry Parish district attorney says he's agreed to not pursue the 
death penalty against a man who agreed to plead guilty in the death of a police 
officer and another person.

Police said Harrison Lee Riley Jr. shot Sunset police officer Henry Nelson with 
Nelson's own weapon last August. Nelson had been called to try to calm a 
domestic disturbance.

Riley also fatally stabbed 40-year-old Shameka Johnson and was charged with 
trying to kill his wife, Courtney Jolivette Riley, and Johnson's sister, 
Shurlay Johnson.

KATC-TV reports (http://bit.ly/1R7YTFU ) Riley has pleaded guilty to 2 counts 
of 1st-degree murder and 2 of attempted 1st-degree murder.

District Attorney Earl Taylor said in a Thursday news release he agreed to 
accept the plea, and a mandatory life prison sentence, after consulting with 
victims' families.

(source: Associated Press)






KENTUCKY----female to face death penalty

Death penalty sought in Hassler murder


Prosecutors are now seeking the death penalty against 2 people charged with 
kidnapping and killing a teenager from Southwest Louisville.

46-year-old Todd Byrd and 23-year-old Monica Mudd are charged with murdering 
19-year-old Meagan Hassler last summer.

Police said the pair believed Hassler had stolen jewelry and drugs from them.

Investigators said Mudd stripped the teen naked, then took her to a wooded area 
near the Bullitt-Jefferson County line and shot her.

Byrd's attorney has filed a motion for the suspects to be tried separately but 
the judge hasn't made a decision.

(source: WHAS news)






UTAH:

SB189: Senate to consider bill that would end death penalty


A bill that would add Utah to the list of 19 states that have ended the death 
penalty for convicted murderers in Utah is waiting for debate in the Utah 
Senate.

SB189 passed s committee vote 5-2 earlier this week and now waits for the 
entire Senate's consideration and vote.

SB189 would eliminate the punishment for 1st-degree felony homicide. If passed, 
the bill would take effect May 10, 2016. However, the bill would not change any 
capital cases currently being prosecuted or keep Utah from carrying out the 
punishment of any nine people currently on death row.

Bill sponsor Sen. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, said there are countless 
reasons for Utah to end its use of capital punishment. He said the high costs, 
its failure to prevent crime, and the possibility of wrongly convicting and 
punishing a person are all purposes behind his sponsoring of the bill.

Urquhart also believes capital punishment inflicts too much suffering on the 
families of inmates and victims waiting for the executions to occur.

3 of the 9 death-row inmates in Utah have been waiting for nearly 30 years for 
their execution and trial to be finalized.

In his presentation to the committee, Urquhart said, "To have those families 
have expectations that someone is going to be put to death and it takes such a 
long time... I think that's abusive."

If the bill passes, Utah would become one of 19 other states that have 
determined the death penalty to be an ineffective, irreversible punishment.

While Urquhart said, "Government shouldn't be in the business of killing," it's 
only been 1 year since he and a majority of Utah legislation voted to 
reauthorize the use of firing squads to execute the death row inmates. At the 
time, state legislature determined firing squads to be much cheaper, quicker 
and more accessible than the previous method of lethal injections.

Only 2 members of the 7-person judiciary committee voted against advancing the 
bill to the senate for debate. Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, and Sen. Todd 
Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said they believe death is a fitting punishment for some 
crimes.

Republican Sen. Daniel Thatcher, R-West Valley City, said he voted to move the 
bill forward Tuesday because it's an important discussion for lawmakers to 
have. But he said he's not sure if he'll support the bill when it comes before 
the full Senate for a vote.

"There are cases - the most extreme, the most gruesome, the most horrific cases 
- that I believe there should be a more significant punishment," he said.

David Shapiro, an attorney who has worked with capital case defendants, spoke 
in favor of the bill, agreeing with Urquhart's reasoning.

"I know that in Arizona, much like in Utah, the average person spends a 
generation on death row," Shapiro said.

However, Shapiro added a personal perspective when he shared that his parents 
were murdered in homicide-arson in their Arizona home. The criminal was caught 
and charged with capital murder, but four years later, the case is not even 
close to a completed trial.

Shapiro said waiting for such a long trial and for the punishment, "is a 
grueling, impossible position for a victim to be in."

If the bill were to become a law, the crime of aggravated murder would be 
punishable by life without the possibility of parole or 25 years to life in 
prison. Shapiro said he believes those sentences would be appropriately harsh 
for his parents' alleged murderer.

"That to me honors my parents' memory," Shapiro said.

(source: The Daily Universe)

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

Why 1 Utah Republican changed his mind on the death penalty - and is leading 
the effort to abolish it


As recently as a year ago, Utah state Sen. Steve Urquhart (R) was supportive of 
the death penalty.

He even voted along with most of his Republican colleagues last year to 
reauthorize the firing squad, and beyond that he didn't really think about it 
much.

But over a recent dinner conversation with a fellow conservative friend, 
Urquhart changed his mind. The death penalty is inefficient, costly and wrong, 
he now says. This legislative session, Urquhart is leading the charge to repeal 
Utah's death penalty, which is only used for aggravated murder.

"It's wrong for government to be in business in killing its own citizens," 
Urquhart told The Fix. "That cheapens life."

His bill passed out of a Senate committee 5 to 2 this week, but he faces an 
uphill battle to get it approved in the Republican-controlled House and Senate, 
and it's unclear whether Utah's Republican governor, Gary Herbert, will sign 
it.

Still, the fact that Republican leaders such as Urquhart are even considering 
abolishing the death penalty suggests there's room in the United States for the 
right to meet the left on one of the country???s most contentious of issues.

And it's not just Utah. In May, Nebraska became the 19th state and the first 
Republican-controlled state in more than 40 years to repeal the death penalty 
(the state's unicameral legislature is technically nonpartisan, but is 
GOP-controlled for all intents and purposes). The fight there is not over. 
Death penalty supporters in Nebraska, led by Gov. Pete Ricketts (R), succeeded 
in getting enough signatures to suspend the repeal law. The state's voters will 
ultimately decide what to do in November.

Despite that, Marc Hyden with Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty, 
a group launched in 2013 to advocate for abolishing capital punishment, thinks 
what's happening in Utah and Nebraska is a sign that the United States is on 
the precipice of a movement to do away with the death penalty.

Lawmakers in Kentucky, Kansas, Montana and New Hampshire are reevaluating 
whether to keep the death penalty on the books this year, he said. "I wouldn't 
be surprised if a few states dump the death penalty" in the next few years, 
Hyden said.

To get a better sense of how the death penalty debate is playing out one 
Republican state legislature, The Fix spoke more in-depth with Urquhart:

Courtesy Sen. Urquhart Courtesy Sen. Urquhart

THE FIX: How long have you been working on this repeal?

URQUHART: About 5 months.

THE FIX: Why are you focusing on this now?

URQUHART: I had a dinner conversation with a friend about capital punishment. 
We picked up the conversation a few times and in subsequent days and weeks, and 
it really made me think. And he won the argument.

THE FIX: Your bill to repeal it has been described, even by you, as a long 
shot.

URQUHART: I think that we're going to pass it; I really do.

I believe I have the votes to pass it out of the Senate, and I'm making 
tremendous headway talking with House members, too. What I'm saying to people 
is, I start out by saying, 'You're in favor the the death penalty, aren't you?' 
And they say yes.

So then I tell them that I understand that but I'd like to talk about the 
difference between the death penalty in reality and the death penalty in 
theory. I ask them how many people on death row can you name, and everyone can 
name a few people, and then I ask them how many of the victims can they name, 
and they can't name the victims. I said that's indicative of what happens. It 
takes years and sometimes decades between the sentence and carrying out the 
sentence. Those folks become famous, and the families are victimized by lots of 
appeals, and they just have scars that can never heal. There's just not 
finality on it.

And we do it at a great cost, $1.6 million for every prisoner we execute.

And then, for the clincher, I ask my conservative friends what they think 
government does extremely well. And then I ask them what they think government 
does perfectly. And they usually say, 'It doesn't do anything perfectly.' And 
then I ask, 'Yet we're going to give ourselves the godlike power over life and 
death?' And by that point, they say they're going to think about and they'd 
like to talk more, and then they're coming back a day or 2 later telling me 
they're going to vote for a repeal.

THE FIX: How do you square your vote to reauthorize the firing squad in Utah 
with your views on the death penalty today?

URQUHART: If that bill came up today, I'd vote the same way. Because as long as 
we have capital punishment, we need to do it in the most effective way, and the 
firing squad is effective.

THE FIX: Beyond the practical arguments against the death penalty, is there any 
religious or moral compass guiding your change of heart?

URQUHART: Originally no, but increasingly yes. I'm thinking that it's wrong for 
government to be in business in killing its own citizens. That cheapens life.

(source: Washington Post)






CALIFORNIA:

San Bernardino County jurors have recommended the death penalty for a man 
convicted of the rape and murder of a woman at a bakery in Fontana more than a 
decade ago


The district attorney's office said Thursday that a jury recommended the death 
sentence for 54-year-old Gilbert Sanchez of Montebello.

Jurors convicted Sanchez in November of the 2001 rape and murder of 30-year-old 
Sylvia Galindo at a bakery in Fontana.

A sentencing hearing for Sanchez has been scheduled for May 27.

(source: Associated Press)






USA:

Unacceptable racial bias persists in capital punishment


Almost 40 years since the Supreme Court relegitimized the death penalty; almost 
30 since they said it's OK that it's racist.

Sometime soon in the 31 states that have not abolished the death penalty, 
leaders at the highest levels of state government, men and women - mostly men 
and mostly white - will hold private, closed-door meetings, in which they will 
discuss the most secretive, most cost-effective, most media-friendly way to go 
about killing 1, or more, of its citizens. Study after study shows that, more 
likely than not, this majority-white group of deathly decision-makers will be 
planning the killing of a man or a woman, though usually they're a man, and 
usually they're a black man.

These macabre meetings focused on sharpening the states' machinery of death 
have been going on ever since the 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Gregg v. 
Georgia. Gregg relegitimized and restarted the wheel of state-sanctioned death 
- a wheel that stopped spinning 4 years earlier, in 1972, when in Furman v. 
Georgia, the high court declared Georgia's death penalty statute - and by 
implication the death penalty statutes of 40 other states - unconstitutional; 
the court held in Furman that the way the states were allowing juries and 
judges to decide who lives and who dies violated the Eighth Amendment's 
prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

But just four years later, after the Gregg decision sanctioned the states' 
newly rewritten death penalty statutes, the wheel of death started spinning 
again. And ever since, overwhelmingly, the condemned strapped to that wheel - 
or gurney, quite literally - have been poor persons of color; most often their 
legal representation has been atrocious. Read famed capital defense attorney 
and Yale law professor, Stephen B. Bright's disturbing article, "Counsel for 
the Poor: The Death Sentence Not for the Worst Crime but for the Worst Lawyer," 
if you have any doubt about that.

Even more repugnant though, study after study shows that the poor, probably 
black, death row inmate will have landed on death row because he killed someone 
white. The most famous of these studies, the "Baldus" study, an extremely 
well-respected empirical study published in 1983, showed that even after taking 
into consideration 39 nonracial variables, defendants charged with killing 
white victims were 4.3 times more likely to receive a death sentence than 
defendants charged with killing blacks. The study also concluded, as quoted by 
Justice Lewis Powell's decision in McCleskey v. Kemp, that "black defendants 
were 1.1 times as likely to receive a death sentence as other defendants."

That has to be unconstitutional, doesn't it? It's an Equal Protection Clause 
violation, right? Part of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the 
Equal Protection Clause, which took effect in 1868, after the Civil War, 
provides that no state shall deny to any person, including a person of color, 
"the equal protection of the laws." If, as the Baldus study convincingly 
showed, a defendant is more likely to get the death penalty solely because the 
victim was white instead of black, that would be a per se violation of the 
Equal Protection Clause, right?

Wrong. In a decision that New York University School of Law professor and 
celebrated Supreme Court advocate Anthony G. Amsterdam called "the Dred Scott 
decision of our time," the court held that because defendant McCleskey, a black 
man, could not specifically prove "purposeful discrimination" had a 
discriminatory effect on him in his trial - the Baldus study his lawyers 
presented to show that the death penalty was racist, and whose findings the 
court notably did not dispute - were irrelevant.

McCleskey was executed in 1991. Beforehand he said, "I pray that one day this 
country, supposedly a civilized society, will abolish barbaric acts such as the 
death penalty."

24 years have passed since McCleskey's last words, but still the majority-white 
death councils convene and still, even 24 years later, even with a black 
president in the White House, their top quarry remains the poorest, darkest, 
worst-represented defendants.

When will it end?

When will African-Americans, white Americans and Americans of all colors demand 
that each and every politician they elect take action, and take action now, to 
put a stop to it?

(source: Op-Ed; Stephen Cooper is former D.C. and federal public 
defender----The Daily Californian)