[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, DEL., VA., FLA., ALA.

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 20




TEXAS----impending execution

Texas Set To Execute Man Amidst Claims That No Murder Took Place----Lawyers for 
Richard Masterson, convicted of strangling a man to death, say he is innocent 
and that the victim died of a heart attack.


Texas is scheduled to execute Richard Masterson on Wednesday for the 2001 
murder of Darin Honeycutt.

Masterson, 42, was convicted and sentenced to death for strangling Honeycutt 
and robbing the victim's home. Masterson confessed to the police but later 
recanted his statement.

Masterson could become the 2nd person to be executed in 2016 and the 1st inmate 
to be executed by Texas this year.

Masterson's attorneys have appealed to state and federal courts to stop his 
execution, and have also asked Gov. Greg Abbott to grant clemency, on the 
grounds that he is innocent. They say that Honeycutt was not murdered, but died 
of a heart attack. None of those appeals have been successful, with most of the 
claims now pending in petitions before the U.S. Supreme Court. The state is 
opposing all of those pending petitions. 3 of the pending claims come out of 
state court denials, and one is an original action filed at the Supreme Court. 
A claim also is pending in the federal appeals courts.

Masterson's main claim is that Texas convicted him based on "false scientific 
testimony" from Paul Shrode, a medical examiner described as a "fraud" who was 
unqualified to perform Honeycutt's autopsy. Shrode testified that Honeycutt 
died when Masterson put him in a sleeper hold, cutting off oxygen to his brain. 
According to Masterson's appeal, Shrode lied on his job application to the 
Harris County Medical Examiner's Office, botched multiple capital-murder 
autopsies including Honeycutt's, and gave false testimony in court. "The 
decedent's death was not a homicide at all. He died of a heart attack caused by 
a preexisting severe coronary artery disease," the one request stated.

His lawyers say that Masterson initially confessed to the crime due to drug 
withdrawal and severe depression. Masterson testified that he voluntarily 
confessed to capital murder because he wanted the death penalty rather than a 
life in prison. He also said that he confessed to killing Honeycutt because he 
was embarrassed to admit that he was having sex with a man when he died. His 
statement to the police was given in exchange for an officer's promise to help 
see that charges against Masterson's nephew were dropped, according to his 
appeal. Masterson's appeal says that his lawyers were ineffective and had 
"failed him at every stage."

As one of Masterson's filings states, Masterson and Honeycutt, who "was known 
to dress as a woman who went by the name of Brandy Houston," left a bar on Jan. 
26, 2001, to have consensual sex. In his initial statement to police, Masterson 
said that he intended to kill Honeycutt in order to rob him. However, during 
his trial, Masterson said that the death was accidental. He said he complied 
with Honeycutt's request for autoerotic asphyxiation and applied pressure to 
his neck. After Honeycutt became unresponsive, Masterson testified that he 
believed he had died and panicked because of his prior convictions. He took a 
VCR from Honeycutt's apartment and opened several drawers "to make the scene 
look like a robbery," according to his lawyers. Masterson also fled in 
Honeycutt's car. Honeycutt's naked body was later found in his bedroom by a 
friend.

"While his efforts to cut oxygen to Mr. Honeycutt's brain likely contributed to 
Mr. Honeycutt's death, Richard did not strangle him to death," Masterson's 
filing stated.

The state has argued that Shrode's "unrelated professional difficulties" were 
not enough to prove Masterson's innocence and noted additional evidence of his 
guilt, including his statement to his brother's boss saying, "I think I put 
somebody to sleep." Masterson also told his brother, James Masterson, that the 
idea that Honeycutt died of heart attack was "bullshit. The state said that 
Masterson confessed to strangling another victim, who survived, within days of 
Honeycutt's death.

Vienna's cardinal, who said that he was in close touch with Masterson, told 
reporters on Monday that Pope Francis - who has called for the abolition of the 
death penalty - was following the case, the Associated Press reported.

"Richard has been waiting 12 years for his execution," Cardinal Schoenborn 
said. "It is frightening."

(source: BuzzFeed News)






DELAWARE:


4 unconstitutional death penalty laws are enough


Last week in an 8 to 1 decision the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Florida 
death penalty was unconstitutional. Applying the reasoning of that decision, 
Hurst v. Florida, to the current Delaware death penalty statute should result 
in it also being found unconstitutional. If that happens, it will be the 4th 
time since 1972 that a Delaware death penalty statute has been invalidated.

In 1972, as the Delaware Criminal Code was being enacted, the U.S. Supreme 
Court decided Furman v. Georgia, which rendered the new Delaware death penalty 
law unconstitutional, so the legislature amended the statute. A few years 
later, in 1977, another Supreme Court ruling, Woodson v. North Carolina, made 
the amended statute unconstitutional, so Delaware adopted yet another version. 
This corrected statute included the fundamental requirement that, before the 
state could execute a defendant, the jury would have to unanimously decide upon 
death. This unanimity requirement was (and still is) shared by the overwhelming 
majority of death penalty states.

In 1991, Delaware eliminated the unanimity requirement and turned the jury vote 
on life or death into a mere recommendation, giving the judge alone the power 
to make the life or death determination. In 2002, another U. S. Supreme Court 
decision demonstrated that the 1991 statute was unconstitutional. The 
legislature changed the law again, but left the life or death determination in 
the hands of a single judge. That has now placed the validity of the 2002 
Delaware statute in doubt.

The current Delaware statute requires a "hybrid" form of sentencing to decide 
whether someone who has been convicted of first degree murder will be 
imprisoned for life without parole or put to death. First, after a sentencing 
hearing, the jury must tell the judge whether it has unanimously found at least 
one statutory aggravating circumstance. This unanimous decision is required for 
a death sentence. Next, the jury decides whether it recommends that the 
aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances, justifying a 
sentence of death. That weighing recommendation need not be unanimous.

Finally, the judge independently decides whether the aggravating circumstances 
outweigh the mitigating circumstances, giving the jury recommendation whatever 
weight he or she deems appropriate. Upon a judge's finding that the aggravating 
circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances, the defendant is sentenced 
to death.

Under longstanding Delaware criminal law, the jury must unanimously find every 
element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet the Delaware Supreme Court 
has ruled several times that the current death penalty statute is 
constitutional even though it requires that the judge, not the jury, make the 
finding necessary for a death sentence.

Hurst v. Florida ruled the Florida statute unconstitutional because it required 
the judge to "determine whether sufficient aggravating circumstances existed to 
justify imposing the death penalty." The Supreme Court did not limit its ruling 
to only a statute like Florida's, which required the judge to decide whether 
there was any aggravating circumstance. Instead, the Court expanded the impact 
of its ruling. It overruled older cases that had said "the Sixth Amendment does 
not require that the specific findings authorizing the imposition of the 
sentence of death be made by the jury." That and the result in Hurst imperil 
the validity of the Delaware statute. Because Delaware law must be consistent 
with controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the courts will very likely to 
be asked to follow Hurst v. Florida, and rule that Delaware's statute is 
unconstitutional.

But there is no reason to wait for another court decision and then have a 
legislative battle over whether Delaware should once again try to enact a 
constitutional death penalty statute. It is time, in the words of U.S. Supreme 
Court Justice Harry Blackmun, for our state to "no longer tinker with the 
machinery of death." A bill to end Delaware's death penalty has passed the 
State Senate twice and has been bottled up in a House of Representatives 
committee during the past 2 legislative sessions. That bill, Senate Bill 40, 
should be brought to a vote in the House, so that if a majority of 
Representatives also agree, Delaware can be done once and for all with trying 
to figure out if there is a constitutional way to put its citizens to death.

(source: Richard Morse is the Legal Diretor of the ACLU of Delaware----The News 
Journal)






VIRGINIA----new execution date

Ricky Gray execution set for March 16


Barring intervention by the courts or the governor, Ricky Javon Gray, who 
murdered a Woodland Heights family on New Year's Day 2006, will be executed on 
March 16, as ordered in Richmond Circuit Court Tuesday.

Gray, 38, was convicted of the murders of Bryan Harvey, 49; Kathryn, 39; and 
their daughters, Stella, 9, and Ruby, 4. He and Ray Dandridge killed the 
Harveys in a string of slayings that left seven people dead in Richmond. Gray 
was sentenced to death for the girls' killings. Dandridge was sentenced to 
life.

Meanwhile, the Virginia Department of Corrections said Tuesday that the 
department lacks the 1st of 3 chemicals used to conduct an execution by 
injection. The 1st chemical - which can be midazolam, pentobarbital or 
thiopental sodium - renders the inmate unconscious while the next 2 stop 
breathing and the heart.

Because of a national shortage, Virginia authorities last year obtained 
midazolam from Texas to execute Alfredo Prieto, leading to last-minute legal 
challenges. Asked if the department was working to obtain the required 
chemical, a spokeswoman said, "the department works to maintain an adequate 
supply of lethal injection drugs so as to be able to carry out court orders; 
however, it has become extremely difficult to obtain lethal injection drugs."

Condemned prisoners in Virginia have had the choice of execution by injection 
or the electric chair since 1995. If the inmate refuses to choose, lethal 
injection is the default means.

Last November, a split panel of the 4th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling 
rejecting Gray's appeals and last month the appeals court declined to rehear 
the case. But last week the court agreed to hold off making its order final 
leaving it unclear if a Richmond Circuit Court judge could proceed with a 
hearing to set an execution date. The execution date must be set for no more 
than 60 days after the hearing.

(source: Richmond Times-Dispatch)

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

Ricky Gray's execution set for March 16


Also Tuesday, the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Gray's motion to 
halt proceedings. Gray could still appeal the case to the Supreme Court or have 
the governor intervene.

Gray was sentenced to death in connection with the 2006 New Year's Day 
quadruple murders of the Harvey family in Richmond. In December, he petitioned 
to have his death penalty case reviewed by all 15 federal appeals court judges 
in Richmond. He remains housed on death row at Sussex I State Prison.

Virginia does not currently have all the drugs needed for a lethal injection, 
according to the Department of Corrections. The department says it does not 
have the 1st drug needed, which can be Midazolam or Pentobarbital or Thiopental 
Sodium. Gray does have the option to select electrocution instead.

He is set to be executed at Greensville Correctional Center. At least 6 
citizens who are not Department of Correction employees must be present during 
an execution, with the method of death chosen by the inmate.

Alfredo R. Prieto was the last inmate put to death in Virginia, on Oct. 1, 
2015.

Gray's death sentence was specifically for the murders of Stella and Ruby 
Harvey, daughters of Bryan and Kathryn Harvey, who were also killed with the 
help of Ray Dandridge. A week later, Percyell Tucker, his wife Mary and their 
daughter, Ashley Baskerville - who was an accomplice in the Harveys' murder - 
were also killed.

(source: WWBT news)






NORTH CAROLINA:

Reputed gang members could get capital punishment trial


It's still yet to be decided if Jamell Cureton, along with reputed gang member 
Malcolm Hartley, will face the death penalty for crimes they allegedly 
committed as members of the United Blood Nation.

In 2015, 6 other reputed gang members pleaded guilty for their role in a 
racketeering and conspiracy case involving the 2014 shooting deaths of Doug and 
Debbie London.

Hartley is accused of shooting the Londons at Cureton's request. Prosecutors 
said the Londons were gunned down in their home to keep them from testifying 
against three United Blood Nation members in an earlier robbery case.

Tuesday morning, prosecutors told a judge they are still waiting on a 
recommendation from the Department of Justice to determine whether or not they 
will pursue the death penalty.

As part of discovery, federal prosecutors said they plan on using the 
interviews they conducted with the criminals who already pleaded guilty in 
connection to this case.

Prosecutors said they hope formal proceedings will continue in February.

(source: WBTV news)






FLORIDA----impending execution

Execution Delay Sought Amid Missing Records


Attorneys for a convicted murderer scheduled to be put to death on St. 
Patrick's Day are asking the Florida Supreme Court for a stay, arguing that 
records - including some stored in an insect-infested shed - were destroyed.

Mark James Asay's case is even more troubling because the death row inmate 
hasn???' had a lawyer to represent him in state court for nearly a decade and 
had no legal representation when Gov. Rick Scott signed the warrant ordering 
Asay's execution, Asay's new attorney wrote in a motion filed Tuesday.

A Jacksonville judge appointed Marty McClain to represent Asay last Wednesday, 
5 days after Scott signed the warrant scheduling Asay's execution for March 17. 
A circuit judge gave McClain until Jan. 25 - 12 days after he was appointed to 
represent Asay - to file any motions for relief.

That's not enough time, McClain argued in Tuesday's 27-page filing. Proceeding 
with the case "would be a violation of due process, equal protection and 
fundamental fairness," he wrote.

"Providing an attorney without the client's files and records is the equivalent 
of providing no counsel at all," McClain wrote.

Hours after McClain filed his request for a stay, the Supreme Court gave 
Department of Corrections Secretary Julie Jones until 5 p.m. Thursday to 
respond.

Scott may not have been aware that Asay did not have a lawyer, as required by 
state law for inmates on death row, when the governor signed the death warrant.

"Given that the statute requires that collateral counsel be in place at all 
times, I would think it would be wise for the governor's office to make sure 
that the statute has been complied with before a warrant is signed," McClain 
said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

In the court filing, McClain wrote that Scott's staff contacted the state 
agency that represents death row inmates after the warrant was signed on Jan. 
8. Capital Collateral Counsel for the Northern Region Robert Friedman told the 
governor's representative that his agency did not represent Asay.

Scott's staff then contacted Thomas Fallis, a private attorney who had 
represented Asay in federal court, according to Tuesday's filing. Fallis told 
the governor's aide that he no longer represented Asay.

"What additional steps the governor's office took to notify Mr. Asay's state 
court counsel of the death warrant is unclear," McClain wrote. "What is clear, 
however, is that despite being given information that at a minimum, Mr. Asay's 
representation was unknown, Governor Scott did not pause or delay the execution 
date in order to ensure that Mr. Asay was or would be represented by competent 
post-conviction counsel."

A spokesman for Scott said that the governor's office contacted Fallis before 
the warrant was signed.

"As is standard procedure in our office, we spoke to his counsel of record,' 
spokesman John Tupps said in an email.

Fallis withdrew from Asay's case in mid-2014, according to McClain.

Asay was convicted in 1988 of the murders of Robert Lee Booker and Robert 
McDowell in downtown Jacksonville. Asay allegedly shot Booker, who was black, 
after calling him a racial epithet. He then killed McDowell, who was dressed as 
a woman, after agreeing to pay him for oral sex. According to court documents, 
Asay later told a friend that McDowell had previously cheated him out of money 
in a drug deal.

McClain said he and his partner, Linda McDermott, started trying to locate 
Asay's files after they were assigned to the case last week.

"What was learned was quite disconcerting - numerous boxes, probably a 
majority, of Mr. Asay's files and records had been destroyed, while those 
records that theoretically still exist, have yet to be located," McClain wrote, 
adding that 33 boxes of records pertaining to Asay's file are missing or were 
destroyed.

Asay was once represented by the predecessor of the Capital Collateral Counsel 
for the Northern Region, but the Legislature shut down the agency in 2004. At 
least some of Asay's records were transferred to Mary Katherine Bonner, a 
lawyer who once worked on his case, according to McClain's brief filed Tuesday.

Fallis, who represented Asay in federal court from 2010 through 2014, obtained 
about 10 boxes of documents from a shed that was "infested with snakes, rats 
and insects" where Bonner stored them, McClain wrote.

Fallis decided the files were "worthless due to the condition in which they 
were stored" and ultimately destroyed them, McClain wrote.

McClain, who has worked on death penalty cases for nearly three decades and 
represented more than 250 clients, and his partner "have never found themselves 
in such dire and disturbing circumstances when representing a capital 
post-conviction defendant with an active death warrant," the lawyers wrote.

During a case-management hearing Friday, lawyers with Attorney General Pam 
Bondi's office and the state attorney who prosecuted Asay told McClain they 
would provide copies of their records regarding Asay's case by the end of the 
day on Tuesday. Bondi's office was unaware that Asay had gone so long without a 
lawyer, McClain wrote.

McClain is also trying to get copies of other case files from the Department of 
State's archives, but he is unsure when the documents will be provided, he 
wrote. As of Tuesday, he still did not have copies of the trial court 
transcripts.

"Historically, this (Supreme) Court has been especially vigilant to the need 
for procedural fairness in capital proceedings, and has accordingly not 
hesitated to enter stays of execution in order to ensure that capital 
petitioners are treated fairly in the litigation of claims for relief during 
the pendency of a death warrant," McClain wrote.

The Florida Supreme Court has granted stays in at least 2 other cases when new 
lawyers for inmates scheduled for execution needed more time. In 1990, the 
court delayed the execution of Paul Christopher Hildwin to give his lawyers 
extra time to review his files. In 2014, the court threw out Hildwin's death 
sentence based on new DNA evidence.

(source: CBS news)

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

February death penalty trial indefinitely delayed for Jacksonville man in 
roommate's death


A Jacksonville death penalty trial scheduled for next month has been 
indefinitely delayed.

Demetrius Kenyon Carter was scheduled to go on trial Feb. 16. Carter, 22, is 
charged with the kidnapping and strangulation of 52-year-old roommate Kenneth 
Mark Brown in 2012.

At the request of Assistant Public Defender Al Perkins, Circuit Judge Mark 
Borello agreed to delay the trial Tuesday. Perkins said the delay was needed 
because more mitigation work had to be done on Carter's childhood and mental 
health issues.

Perkins also said a recent staff shakeup at the office of 4th Circuit Public 
Defender Matt Shirk, with several lawyers leaving the case and several others 
coming on, was a factor.

Assistant State Attorney Rich Mantei expressed frustration at the delay, but 
did not object, saying Perkins was citing valid issues.

Perkins also said he plans to argue that Carter cannot face the death penalty 
because the Florida Supreme Court found the state's sentencing procedures to be 
unconstitutional last week. Borello said he saw no need to deal with that issue 
now since Carter is not going on trial anytime soon.

Carter and John Michael Taylor Jr., 24, are accused of strangling Brown and 
then burying him the backyard of the Lamson Street home they rented. Taylor 
hasn't been found competent to go to trial.

(source: Florida Times-Union)

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

Victim's mom fights against death penalty


A Jacksonville woman says she won't stop fighting for justice in the wake of a 
U.S. Supreme Court decision ruling Florida's death penalty unconstitutional.

It was 2013 when 20-year-old Shelby Farah was shot and killed while working at 
a north Jacksonville Metro PCS.

Wednesday marks the incident 2 1/2 years to the day.

Her mom, Darlene, is adamantly against the death penalty.

Farah can't stop thinking of the potential her 20-year-old daughter had, before 
police say she was shot and killed by James Rhodes during an armed robbery.

"Always had a smile on her face, very outgoing, she just lit up the room," said 
Shelby's mother, Darlene Farah.

With last week's ruling that Florida's death penalty is unconstitutional, Farah 
says she's worried how it could further delay the case.

Right now, jury selection is scheduled for May 2.

"I was glad it was going to be almost over with, and now it's like 'oh no... 
not again,'" said Farah.

Farah says the 2 years of waiting for justice has been excruciating for her 
family.

She says the whole process would take more time, and in turn be more grueling 
for family in the event of a death sentence. Farah believes only God should 
have a say when a life should end.

"I sit there and I think what we could have accomplished as far as our healing 
process," said Farah.

Farah says before state prosecutors told her they would push for the death 
penalty, they originally approached her about a possible life without parole 
sentence.

"I just wish the state attorney's office would understand what we're going 
through," said Farah.

Farah says she's scheduled a meeting with Bernie de la Rionda at the state 
attorney's office for Thursday in the wake of last week's decision.

"I just want everybody to pray to God that everything works out Thursday," said 
Farah.

Still, despite any potential delays the U.S. Supreme Court ruling may cause, 
Farah says she's hoping it's a step in the right direction in getting rid of 
the death penalty, something she says even Shelby would have fought for.

"We just have to carry her legacy on," said Farah.

Farah says if she doesn't get anywhere in her meeting on Thursday, she has a 
next step planned she will reveal when and if that time comes.

(source: firstcoastnews.com)

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

Jacksonville coalition asks State Attorney to suspend seeking capital 
punishment


The U.S. Supreme Court struck down Florida's death penalty sentencing system 
last week, declaring it violates defendants' Sixth Amendment Rights to trial by 
jury.

In response to the Hurst v. Florida decision, a Jacksonville coalition of civic 
and faith groups - Justice 4 Jacksonville - is calling on State Attorney Angela 
Corey to stop action on all capital murder cases until Florida's sentencing 
statutes are repaired.

Keyontay Humphries, campaign coordinator for Justice 4 Jacksonville, which is 
affiliated with the ACLU, issued this statement last week:

"Today's ruling proves what the Justice 4 Jacksonville Coalition has been 
saying since its creation - that the 4th Judicial Circuit's outrageously high 
use of the death penalty is sending people into a system that can't be trusted.

"400 people currently sit on Florida's death row because of a death sentencing 
scheme that has now been declared unconstitutional, and an enormous share of 
those 400 come from the 4th Judicial Circuit. All of their sentences should be 
re-evaluated now that the system that sent them to death row has been found 
unconstitutional.

"It would also be unconscionable for more people to be sentenced under a scheme 
that has been found to be unconstitutional. For that reason, we are calling on 
State Attorney Angela Corey to pursue no further action in any capital cases 
until a more reliable - and constitutional - system has been put in place."

The Fourth Judicial Circuit, comprising Duval, Nassau and Clay counties, was 
responsible for handing out 1/4 of all Florida's death sentences in 2012. In 
2010 and 2011, almost 1/2 of all new Florida death sentences came from the 
Fourth Judicial Circuit.

Duval County ranks 8th in the nation in administering death sentences. It's in 
a tiny minority of counties nationwide - only 2 % - that are responsible for 
doling out more than 56 % of all the death sentences in the United States.

Through her spokesman, Corey responded to the call to halt death penalty 
action:

"The death penalty is still a viable sentence in the state of Florida. We will 
follow the law, and in appropriate cases, State Attorney Corey will still seek 
the death penalty. This opinion deals with procedural issues which will be 
addressed by the Florida Supreme Court and the Legislature."

Hurst v. Florida is expected to open the floodgates of death penalty litigation 
for up to 80 % of death row inmates, who were sentenced based on split, 
majority-only jury findings in the penalty phases of their trials.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing the majority opinion in the 8-1 decision, 
stated: "The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact 
necessary to impose a sentence of death. A jury's mere recommendation is not 
enough."

Florida law authorizes judges to make the final decision on sentencing in death 
penalty cases, while requiring them to give "great weight" to the jury 
recommendation. Using split, majority-vote findings reduces the jury to 
"adviser" status, which the Court says violates the Sixth Amendment.

While the Court did not mention jury unanimity in its opinion, attorneys say 
that the manner in which a jury makes findings is through unanimous verdicts, 
not majority-vote recommendations.

In death penalty cases in Florida, a separate fact-finding analysis, which 
weighs aggravating and mitigating factors in the case, is conducted after a 
guilty verdict is reached.

ACLU staff attorney Adam Tebrugge said changing the law to require unanimous 
penalty phase verdicts would go a long way toward satisfying Sixth Amendment 
requirements. He added that those unanimous verdicts should be binding in 
Florida law, instead of merely advisory, in light of Hurst.

"There's a strong argument that a 7-5 finding is not sufficient to find any 
facts," Tebrugge said, referring to the split jury vote on which the trial 
judge based his death sentence in Hurst.

"If you don't require a unanimous jury, it destroys the deliberations process," 
he added. "You just vote, and you don't even have to talk about it."

Tebrugge believes that caution is in order, despite the Florida Supreme Court's 
expedited schedule for death row inmates. "The issues are very complex and the 
[state] courts don't have an answer for us. We need to slow things down ... 
Let's get it right."

For a comprehensive history and analysis of the split jury issue, see Alexandra 
Zayas' article from 2013 by clicking here. To learn about a new study regarding 
racial disparities in Florida's application of the death penalty, see Mitch 
Perry's Florida Politics piece here.

----

(source: Julie Delegal, a University of Florida alumna, is a contributor for 
Folio Weekly, Jacksonville's alternative weekly, and writes for the family 
business, Delegal Law Offices----floridapolitics.com)

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

Report Finds 74% of Florida Death Row Inmates Had Non-Unanimous Death Verdicts


Florida's death row would be 3/4 smaller if the state followed the practice of 
all but 2 other states and required that a jury unanimously agree that a death 
sentence can be imposed before a defendant can be sentenced to death. Alabama 
and Delaware also permit judges to impose death sentences following 
non-unanimous jury recommendations for death. After an 18-month investigation 
into the cases of Florida's 390 death-row prisoners, The Villages Daily Sun 
found that judges had imposed death sentences 287 times (74%) after jurors had 
split on whether to recommend death. The paper found that 43% of the state's 
death-row prisoners would have received life sentences if, as is required in 
Alabama, the state required a "supermajority" vote of jurors (10 or more) 
before the jury could recommend death. Florida's high rate of death sentencing 
has driven up the costs of housing the state's death row, which state officials 
have estimated at between $8.7 and $9.6 million annually. The state's 
sentencing scheme was recently struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hurst 
v. Florida because its statute permitted the judge, rather than the jury, to 
determine whether the prosecution had proven "aggravating circumstances" that 
make a capital defendant eligible for a death sentence. Although Delaware, like 
Florida, allows a recommendation for death by a simple majority of the jury (7 
out of 12), it first requires the jury to unanimously find the aggravating 
factors that justify a death sentence. Florida's next scheduled execution is 
that of Michael Ray Lambrix, set for February 11. The Florida Supreme Court has 
ordered briefing in Lambrix's case on how the Hurst decision affects his case 
and whether it should be applied retroactively to other cases. The Court has 
scheduled oral argument for February 2.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)






ALABAMA----imepdning execution

Courts deny Alabama death row inmate request to halt Thursday execution

2 courts on Tuesday denied Alabama death row inmate Christopher Brooks' request 
to block his execution on Thursday.

The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the request late Tuesday 
afternoon. So did the Alabama Supreme Court.

Brooks' attorneys say they will appeal both the Alabama high court and 11th 
Circuit rulings to the U.S. Supreme court.

Brooks is scheduled to be put to death at 6 p.m. Thursday by lethal injection 
at Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. It would be Alabama's first 
execution since July 2013 and the first using the state's new three-drug 
combination.

Brooks was convicted in the December 1992 rape and beating death of Jo Deann 
Campbell.

Brooks had sought an emergency stay of execution from the 11th Circuit. He 
argued he should be given a chance to have his execution delayed, at least 
until lawsuits by him and other inmates challenging Alabama's new 3-drug lethal 
injection protocol have been decided at a trial in April.

23 years after her brutal death, and with her convicted killer just four days 
from his execution, Jo Deann Campbell's 2 sisters remember her as a bubbly 
person who was friends with everyone she met. Christopher Brooks is asked a 
court to stay his execution.

In its opinion this afternoon denying the stay, the court noted that Brooks in 
November had joined a federal lawsuit filed by five other death row inmates 
challenging the constitutionality of Alabama's method of execution.

The inmates in that lawsuit claim that Alabama's new 3-drug lethal injection 
protocol - which uses midazolam, rocuronium bromide, and potassium chloride - 
created a substantial risk of serious harm in violation of the Cruel and 
Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eighth Amendment.

A federal judge denied his motion for a stay of execution in December and he 
filed the appeal to the 11th Circuit. The trial court denied his motion for a 
stay, explaining that Brooks had not shown a substantial likelihood of success 
on the merits of his Eighth Amendment claim because: he failed to show an 
available and feasible alternative method of execution as required by case law 
and he failed to show that he brought this claim within the applicable 2-year 
statute of limitations.

"Moreover, the district court determined that the balance of equities weighed 
against granting a stay because Brooks unreasonably delayed bringing his 
lawsuit until it was too late to resolve the merits of his claim without 
staying his execution," the appeals court stated.

In its ruling Tuesday afternoon the 11th Circuit affirmed the federal judge's 
ruling and denied Brooks' emergency motion to stay the execution.

Brooks' attorneys on Friday also filed another request for a stay with the 
Alabama Supreme Court, which had already previously denied a stay request.

In last week's request to the state high court Brooks' attorneys had also 
argued that the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled Florida's law allowing judge's to 
override jury sentence recommendations in capital cases was unconstitutional. 
Alabama also is 1 of 2 other states that have judicial override.

Brooks' sentence did not result from a judicial override. At his trial the jury 
voted 11 to 1 to recommended death. The judge followed that recommendation.

Under Alabama law fewer than 10 jurors voting to recommend a death sentence 
results in a recommendation of life without parole. But a judge can override a 
life without parole recommendation and impose a death sentence.

Brooks' attorneys issued a statement Tuesday afternoon saying they will appeal 
both the 11th Circuit and Alabama Supreme Court denial of the stay requests.

"We believe the 11th Circuit erred in denying Mr. Brooks' stay motion and his 
appeal, and we will be asking the United States Supreme Court to review the 
decision," the attorneys state.

"As noted in our briefing, we believe the Supreme Court's ruling in Glossip v. 
Gross requires the 11th Circuit to overturn the District Court's ruling and 
allow Mr. Brooks to put on evidence showing that a 3-drug protocol involving 
midazolam will leave him aware but unable to communicate while he is tortured 
to death with the 2nd and 3rd drugs," Brooks' attorneys stated. "This question 
of what individuals challenging lethal injection protocols must prove in order 
to succeed affects other Alabama death row prisoners, not just Mr. Brooks, and 
should be considered at a measured pace."

"Furthermore, major questions remain about whether midazolam is suitable as the 
first drug in a three-drug execution protocol like Alabama's, and those 
questions will be answered during the April hearing already set on the issue," 
Brooks' attorneys stated. "In 2015, courts in a very similar situation denied a 
stay to Oklahoma inmate Charles Warner, who was executed a week before the 
Supreme Court granted certiorari on the very question his request for a stay 
was connected to. It has since emerged that Mr. Warner was executed using the 
wrong drugs, and now all Oklahoma executions are on hold while the state 
investigates exactly what is going on in its department of corrections."

"It would be a tragedy and a travesty if Mr. Brooks suffered the same fate as 
Mr. Warner and was executed while the rest of his co-plaintiffs benefited from 
having their claims heard and decided," Brooks' attorneys stated.

Brooks' attorneys also stated they will be filing a separate petition asking 
the United States Supreme Court to review the Alabama Supreme Court's denial of 
a stay based on last week's ruling in Hurst v. Florida, in which the United 
States Supreme Court found Florida's death sentencing scheme to be 
unconstitutional. "Since Alabama's sentencing scheme is virtually identical to 
Florida's, we believe the Hurst decision is applicable here as well and that 
the Sixth Amendment requires that he get a new sentencing hearing," Brooks' 
attorneys stated.

The Alabama Attorney General's Office has stated that the Florida ruling does 
not affect Alabama.

(source: al.com)

***********

Lawyers For Alabama Man Ask Supreme Court To Halt Thursday's Scheduled 
Execution


A week after the Supreme Court struck down Florida's death sentencing scheme, 
lawyers for Christopher Brooks are asking the Supreme Court to put his 
execution on hold while the justices can decide whether Alabama's system is 
similarly unconstitutional.

Lawyers for an Alabama man due to be executed on Thursday have asked the 
Supreme Court to step in and stop his execution because of claimed similarities 
between the death sentencing laws in Alabama and Florida - whose death 
sentencing scheme was struck down by the justices this past week.

Alabama, like Florida, places the final decision of whether to impose death on 
the judge - not a jury.

The petition for a writ of certiorari and application for a stay of execution 
in Christopher Brooks's case were filed at the court after business hours on 
Tuesday, lawyers for Brooks told BuzzFeed News.

The filings, provided to BuzzFeed News, came hours after the Alabama Supreme 
Court had denied Brooks's initial request that the state court put his 
execution on hold while it determined the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court's 
decision in the Florida case, Hurst v. Florida.

Brooks was sentenced to death in 1993 for the 1992 murder of Jo Deann Campbell. 
The jury in his case had recommended a death sentence on an 11-1 vote. Judge 
James Hard, after hearing additional evidence, sentenced Brooks to death.

(source: BuzzFeed News)