[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, S.C., GA., LA., MO., CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

March 28



TEXAS:

Petitioning Governor Greg Abbott and Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles----No 
execution for Robert Roberson in Texas


Robert Roberson was condemned to death for killing 2002 his 2-year-old daughter 
Nikki. Since 2004 he claims that not he but the sister of his former 
girl-friend, Heather Berryhill, shook the baby after smoking crack-cocaine. The 
next morning he brought free-willing his injured daughter to the hospital. 
Therefore he should not be executed but punished with a prison sentence. 
Otherwise the next shaken baby will not be brought to the hospital anymore.

Through a car accident he suffers with brain injuries. A psychiatrist of the 
defense was not allowed to testify in the guilt-innocence phase of the trial. A 
sexual assault of the little girl was one point of the indictments but not 
shown by the autopsy. Therefore the trial was unfair and we demand a new trial 
or a commutation of the death sentence to a prison sentence.

see: 
https://www.change.org/p/governor-greg-abbott-and-texas-board-of-pardons-and-
paroles-no-execution-for-robert-roberson-in-texas

(source: change.org)






SOUTH CAROLINA:

A Judge Overturned a Death Sentence Because the Prosecutor Compared a Black 
Defendant to King Kong ---- The South Carolina prosecutor is known as 'Death 
Penalty Donnie.'


A federal trial judge in South Carolina last week overturned the death sentence 
of a man convicted of stabbing his victim more than 70 times with a 
screwdriver. The sentencing phase of the trial of Johnny O'Landis Bennett was 
so infected by racial animus by the prosecutor and a juror, U.S. District Judge 
Richard Mark Gergel concluded, that Bennett was deprived of his constitutional 
right to due process.

The granting of habeas relief is a rare thing these days, but Judge Gergel's 
order in the Bennett case is remarkable for 2 other reasons. First, it 
highlights the lack of meaningful judicial review capital cases like this 
receive from state judges in South Carolina, jurists who time and again in 
Bennett's case excused the racist theme of the hearing. Second, the judicial 
rebuke marks a fitting epitaph for the professional career of Donald V. Myers, 
a legal legend in that neck of the woods.

Myers, also known as "Doctor Death" and "Death Penalty Donnie," sent 28 people 
to death row in South Carolina during his decades as the state's most 
flamboyant prosecutor. In doing so he earned public praise and the scorn of 
countless defense attorneys whose clients endured Myers' courtroom theatrics. 
Once, grieving the death of his own son in 2003, Myers pressed for the death 
penalty against Robert Northcutt, who had confessed to killing his 4-year-old 
daughter because she wouldn't stop crying. Here's how one reporter in 2006 
chronicled what happened at the trial:

Myers snubbed the defense attorney by reading the sports section of The State 
newspaper when the attorney questioned witnesses. Myers bent a doll's back over 
a crib's rail to show jurors how Northcutt broke his daughter's back.

In his closing argument, he covered the crib with a black cloth and wheeled it 
past the jury box like a funeral procession. In the crib was a sheet that 
belonged to his son.

"He was always with me," Myers said, fighting back tears. "That was a way of 
keeping him close to me."

Myers cried at least 16 times during his closing argument, according to an 
appeal of the case filed with the state Supreme Court.

Northcutt's lawyer, David Bruck, said Myers was out of control. Bruck objected 
20 times during Myers' argument, including when Myers said a life sentence 
would "declare open season on babies in Lexington County."

Earlier this month, after his second drunk driving arrest, but before Judge 
Gergel admonished him, Myers announced that he won't run again when his current 
term expires in January. And now Bennett's fate is again uncertain. A black man 
convicted of murdering another black man, Bennett was first sentenced to death 
in 1995. That conviction was overturned in 1997 when the lawyers learned that a 
juror had been seated in the capital trial even after he said he would "go with 
the majority of the jury" even if he had doubts "as to whether the defendant 
should get the death penalty."

Bennett, a large, hulking man, then was re-sentenced to death in 2000 by an 
all-white jury in Lexington County. When one witness, a white woman, testified 
that Bennett had attacked her weeks before the murder, Myers asked the witness 
if she had dreamt of anything while in a coma. Yes, she told jurors, "Indians 
were chasing me trying to kill me, and the thing I thought was they were 
black." Both before and after that answer, Bennett's lawyer objected and moved 
for a mistrial. It was denied; the prosecutor had not elicited the "black 
Indian" dream testimony, a state judge subsequently (and erroneously) ruled.

Later, Myers introduced testimony that Bennett had had sex with a female prison 
guard while awaiting his trial. During his cross-examination of the witness, 
Myers identified the guard as "the blond-headed lady." Again, Bennett's lawyer 
immediately objected and asked for a mistrial, arguing that Myers had 
improperly signalled the all-white Southern jury that the big black defendant 
had a white lover. The trial judge again overruled the defense, declaring in 
open court: "maybe it [sic] just the way things are these days, but when 
somebody says blond, I don't necessarily see a white woman."All of this was a 
precursor to Myers' closing argument. Bennett's lawyer had claimed his client 
had been a compliant prisoner, that he would not pose a future danger if given 
a life sentence. To this Myers responded by calling Bennett "a monster" and a 
"caveman" and a "beast of burden" before telling jurors this:

"If you give him life, the real Johnny will come back. You give him life and 
he'll come back out. Meeting him again will be like meeting King Kong on a bad 
day."

Another request for a mistrial. Another denial by the trial judge. And Bennett 
was sentenced to death. Then, 6 years later, 1 of Bennett's post-conviction 
lawyers asked 1 of the jurors from that 2000 sentencing why the juror had 
thought Bennett had killed his victim." "Because he was just a dumb nigger," 
the juror candidly responded. "I apologize for saying that word," the juror 
then said under oath, "but after going through that thing for an entire week 
and all the evidence piling up against him, that was just the way I felt about 
it."

Even this admission from one of the people who put Bennett on death row did not 
sway the South Carolina courts. The juror's post-trial statement did not 
justify granting Bennett relief, state court judges concluded in 2006, because 
it did not establish that the juror was "racially biased at the time of the 
resentencing trial." 7 years later, in 2013, the South Carolina Supreme Court 
refused to reconsider that issue. 1 year after that Bennett's attorneys filed 
their federal habeas petition.

Which brings us back to Judge Gergel. "It is notable that none of the reviewing 
(state) courts evaluated the potential impact of these various racially charged 
statements or evidence collectively, analyzing each in isolation," he wrote in 
his March 16 order. "Further, no court addressed what was clearly [Myers'] 
calculated effort to introduced the challenged evidence." But the federal judge 
saved his most pointed analysis for Myers' "King Kong" reference during closing 
argument. He wrote:

"The Court is mindful that the state courts have characterized [Myers'] King 
Kong statement as a harmless reference to [Bennett's] immense size without any 
racial overtones. The Court finds such an analysis involves 'an unreasonable 
determination of the facts in light of the evidence...'

The fact that [Bennett] is a very large black man makes the King Kong reference 
even more odious and inflammatory in this case because it plays upon a racist 
stereotype of the bestial black savage that seems calculated to animate and 
excite the all-white Lexington County jury."

Judge Gergel also tackled the issue of the juror who had called Bennett "just a 
dumb nigger." The South Carolina courts had failed here, also, to protect 
Bennett's constitutional rights to a fair trial free from racial animus. "If 
this blatant statement of racial hostility does not amount to evidence of 
constitutionally impermissible racial bias," the judge wrote, "it is hard to 
imagine what evidence could meet that standard."

Myers promised last week to appeal Judge Gergel's order and it's likely that 
this appeal, to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, will outlast the 
remainder of Myers' career in public office. He did not respond to a request 
for comment from The Marshall Project. Meanwhile, for all the bluster, 6 of 
Myers' 28 capital defendants have been executed. Another 12 have had their 
sentences shortened to life without parole.

(source: themarshallproject.org)






GEORGIA:

States debating alternatives to lethal injection


Lethal injection is the primary method used for the death penalty and in just 
days it'll be used on a Georgia death row inmate, but the drugs limited 
availability has some states looking for a new solution.

The method has been the primary use of execution since 1982 and now 1,425 
executions later, states are starting to rethink it for the death penalty. 
Virginia has a bill on the table trying to bring back the electric chair. It's 
passed the state house and senate and now waits for a Governor's signature.

The main reason, the lethal drugs are hard to come by and we are seeing that 
close to home. Last year, South Carolina ran out of the lethal injection 
cocktail, putting 44 executions on hold. Also in March of last year the 1st 
woman put on Georgia's death row in 70 years Kelly Gissender had her death 
rescheduled several times between march and June because the lethal drug again 
was hard to come by.

Also in June there was a case of cloudiness due to shipping and storing that 
delayed Gissender's death again. Georgia also had an issue a few years ago 
where it was running out of the drug completely. Starting from 2010 when states 
where asked to use a new formula several cases had botched drugs causing a slow 
death for several inmates, several states issued holds on capital punishment.

Right now there are 19 states that have outlawed capital punishment, 5 states 
since 2009.

Although there have been difficulties case by case, for now, Georgia is 
continuing with lethal injection for the death penalty. Joshua Daniel Bishop is 
scheduled to die on Thursday for an armed robbery where he beat a man to death 
for not turning over his Jeep keys. Another, Kenneth Fults is set for lethal 
injection execution on April 12th.

(source: WRDW news)






LOUISIANA:

Prosecutors appeal mental disability-death sentence issue in 1993 killing of 
Cpl. Betty Smothers


The U.S. Supreme Court should reinstate Kevan Brumfield's death sentence in the 
1993 ambush slaying of Baton Rouge police Cpl. Betty Smothers because Brumfield 
is not, was not and never has been mentally disabled, prosecutors contend.

The East Baton Rouge Parish District Attorney's Office is asking the high court 
to reverse U.S. District Judge James Brady, of Baton Rouge, and a New Orleans 
federal appeals court and reinstate state District Judge Richard Anderson's 
2003 conclusion that Brumfield is not mentally disabled.

Brady decided in 2012 that Brumfield, now 43, is mentally disabled and 
therefore ineligible for execution. After much legal back-and-forth, a 3-judge 
panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Brady's decision in 
December.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Atkins v. Virginia in 2002, barred the execution of 
people found to be intellectually impaired.

In the Baton Rouge case, prosecutors Prem Burns and Monisa Thompson argue in a 
Supreme Court petition filed March 14 that Brumfield was never diagnosed with a 
mental disability in preparation for his 1995 capital murder trial in 
Anderson's courtroom. Brumfield's 1st allegation of mental disability, the 
prosecutors point out, came after the high court's Atkins decision 7 years 
later.

Psychologists Ricardo Weinstein, Stephen Greenspan and Victoria Swanson, expert 
witnesses for Brumfield, testified in Brady's courtroom in 2010 that Brumfield 
is mentally disabled. But the state's experts - psychiatrist Robert Blanche, 
psychologist Donald Hoppe and neuropsychologist John Bolter - testified he is 
not. Bolter was initially a defense trial expert for Brumfield.

Weinstein, according to Burns and Thompson, holds the "unique distinction" of 
being the 1st person to diagnose Brumfield as being mentally disabled. The 
diagnosis came in 2007, when Brumfield was 34, they note.

In his 2012 decision, Brady found Weinstein and Swanson "more credible" than 
the state's experts.

"This credibility determination is overwhelmingly flawed, especially 
considering the facts that Drs. Weinstein and Swanson are active advocates 
against the death penalty," Burns and Thompson allege in their petition to the 
Supreme Court. The prosecutors say Swanson determined Brumfield was 
intellectually disabled before she met him and did not meet him until 2 1/2 
years after she wrote her report declaring him mentally disabled.

Greenspan, one of Brumfield's experts, did not meet the convicted killer and 
did not give an opinion on his mental status because the psychologist did not 
think it was "ethical" or "professionally responsible" for him to make a mental 
disability diagnosis without meeting Brumfield, according to the petition by 
Burns and Thompson.

"Amazingly, this is exactly what ... Dr. Swanson did," the prosecutors claim.

Weinstein, they add, makes his living testifying in Atkins cases for the 
defense and has lectured on the defense circuit in "Making the Case for Life" 
seminars.

Nick Trenticosta, one of Brumfield's attorneys, said Thursday he will file 
papers at the Supreme Court next month opposing the state's petition.

As for the state's experts, Burns and Thompson say Hoppe testified before Brady 
that Brumfield has a conduct disorder and an antisocial personality disorder 
but no mental disability. Blanche, the psychiatrist for the East Baton Rouge 
Parish Prison, likewise testified Brumfield's case was a "classic case of 
conduct disorder," the prosecutors say.

Bolter found Brumfield to have an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and 
borderline intellectual functioning but nothing to suggest he was mentally 
disabled, they argue.

Burns and Thompson further claim that Brumfield was subjected to at least 6 
intellectual assessments before the age of 18, and not one showed he was 
mentally disabled.

Cpl. Smothers, 36, a single mother of 6 children, was shot to death Jan. 7, 
1993, outside a Jefferson Highway bank where she had driven a grocery store 
manager to make a night deposit as part of Smothers' off-duty security job. The 
manager was wounded in the hail of gunfire but survived.

Burns and Thompson contend the facts of the crime negate Brumfield's claim of 
intellectual disability.

"Brumfield's adaptive skills in planning the robbery (scoping out the bank days 
in advance, renting a car off the street and purchasing the handguns) and then 
attempting to escape punishment (fleeing the scene, asking others to create 
alibis, disposing of the handguns and the car, and repeatedly lying to 
authorities) are strong evidence of satisfactory adaptive skills," they 
maintain.

"The facts of this crime - with its premeditated aspects - lack the 
impulsiveness and nonleadership interaction often associated with mentally 
retarded individuals. ..."

Smothers' oldest child, former NFL running back Warrick Dunn, who starred at 
Catholic High School in Baton Rouge and Florida State University, has called 
Brumfield's use of mental disability as a defense "offensive and morally 
wrong." Smothers was killed 2 days after Dunn's 18th birthday.

A 2nd Baton Rouge man, Henri Broadway, is on death row in the Smothers case. He 
was accused of firing bullets into her police car and wounding the grocery 
store employee. Brumfield was accused of fatally shooting Smothers.

Broadway, 45, is seeking a new trial, claiming his trial attorneys were 
ineffective.

(source: The Advocate)






MISSOURI:

Judge appropriately rules to release execution drug info


When it comes to the death penalty, we have opined before that all matters of 
execution deserve extra scrutiny.

Even when appeals are inconvenient to the survivors of victims of horrible 
crimes, our legal system has a constitutional obligation, and in our view a 
moral one, to examine every aspect to ensure that those we are executing have 
exhausted their legal protections and their rights under the constitution.

The death penalty is the most severe punishment we have to offer; it is 
uncorrectable, and we must treat it seriously. It is not an act of revenge, but 
an act of justice. It requires level heads and close examination.

That, along with our position to encourage transparency in government, is why 
we were pleased to see that a Missouri judge ruled on March 22 that the state 
must reveal the source of the drug it uses to execute prisoners, finding that 
the state's Department of Corrections "knowingly violated" Missouri's 
open-records law.

We understand there are reasons why the government might want to keep the drug 
secret. The makers of the drug might find themselves in the political 
spotlight, finding themselves the targets of boycotts and backlash. They may 
decide to decease making the drug, which creates problems for the state of 
Missouri. It's possible. But it's not a good enough reason for our government 
to keep its execution methods hidden from public view.

Since 2013, according to the Associated Press, Missouri has executed 18 men 
using the drug pentobarbital. Where the state gets the drug is unknown, 
according to the Associated Press. Major drug companies have refused to allow 
their drugs to be used in executions.

Missouri has refused to disclose the source of their drugs, though the sources 
are widely believed to be compounding pharmacies that make drugs tailored to 
the needs of a specific client. Those pharmacies, according to AP, do not face 
the same approval process or testing standards of larger pharmaceutical 
companies.

Several news organizations, including The Associated Press, Kansas City Star 
and St. Louis Post-Dispatch filed a lawsuit in 2014, arguing that disclosure 
reduces risk that "improper, ineffective or defectively prepared drugs are 
used."

The state attempted to argue that a Sunshine Law exemption that protected the 
identification of members of the execution team also protected the drugmaker. 
This is yet another glaring example of how government officials try to pervert 
the law to keep data and information hidden from the public. In this case, the 
public's right to know outweighs a contractor's preference for privacy and 
certainly the government's desire for convenience.

The information will not be released until the appeals process plays out, but 
already the state has been ordered to pay $73,000 in legal fees to the media 
organizations.

The death penalty is a very controversial topic in our nation. Those who favor 
and oppose can be found from all political affiliations and personal 
backgrounds. It is essential that the public is allowed to examine how the 
government stands up to the Constitution and how it puts people to death. If we 
are to kill people legally, then all facts and methods should be exposed. 
Missouri's expensive attempts to shroud the facts says a lot about its priority 
for transparency.

(source: Editorial, semissourian.com)






CALIFORNIA:

Slaying of girl, 8, puts focus on problematic death penalty


A decision by prosecutors to seek the death penalty in a high-profile Oakland 
murder case going to trial Monday is focusing renewed attention on capital 
punishment in a state where no prisoners have been executed in more than a 
decade.

The outcome of the trial of Darnell Williams, 25, who is charged with 
1st-degree murder in the killing of 8-year-old Alaysha Carradine, will be up to 
an Alameda County jury. Williams, whose also charged with killing a man during 
a dice game, faces 2 special circumstances that make him eligible for the death 
penalty - committing multiple murders and lying in wait.

But if he is convicted and sentenced to death, the likelihood of his undergoing 
lethal injection is tenuous at best, experts say.

Even with the death penalty on hiatus as the state revamps execution protocols 
found unconstitutional by a federal judge nearly 10 years ago, prosecutors 
continue to seek capital punishment as a tool against society's worst 
offenders.

"I've been on both sides," said Darryl Stallworth, a former prosecutor with the 
Alameda County district attorney's office, who wasn't speaking specifically 
about the Williams case. "Prosecutors believe, like most people, that it should 
be used as a deterrent and that the person's death will give the family 
closure.

"But they're never going to get closure," continued Stallworth, who now 
advocates against the death penalty. "Because that person will likely never be 
executed."

Victims' emotions

Evelyn McGann, leader of the East Bay chapter of Parents of Murdered Children, 
a victims advocacy group that hosts monthly support meetings, said members of 
her organization are often craving justice any way they can get it.

"I have people who come to my meetings who've lost family to cold-blooded 
murder and that's all they want, to see this person put on death row,??? said 
McGann, whose son, Richard, was murdered in 1984. "I wouldn't hesitate (to 
impose the death penalty) if it was the man who killed my son."

A gag order has been placed over Williams' trial, forbidding attorneys from 
talking to the media and the public about the case. But on paper, it???'s clear 
to see why prosecutors checked all the boxes that prompted them to seek the 
death penalty.

On July 17, 2013, around 11:15 p.m., Williams allegedly went to the Oakland 
apartment where Alaysha and other children were having a sleepover. Authorities 
say he was bent on revenge for the slaying of a friend 4 hours earlier.

After ringing the doorbell at the Dimond District apartment, police said, 
Williams began firing before the door even opened.

Within seconds, Alaysha was felled by a barrage of bullets. A 7-year-old 
playmate, the playmate's 4-year-old brother and their 63-year-old grandmother 
were all injured.

Authorities suspect Williams was gunning for anyone associated with Antiown 
York, a man he blamed for killing 26-year-old Jermaine Davis earlier that 
evening in Berkeley. York's children and their mother lived at the apartment.

Davis' cousin, Joseph Carroll, was initially accused of helping to plan the 
Oakland shooting by casing the apartment. Murder charges against Carroll were 
later dropped, but he still faces counts of conspiring with 3 other defendants 
to murder 2 men he believed had disrespected him and his brother in an 
unrelated incident.

The senselessness of Alaysha's death rocked the community. Police Chief Sean 
Whent and then-Mayor Jean Quan were among hundreds of people who attended a 
memorial service, in which the little girl nicknamed Ladybug was remembered for 
a sparkling smile and sweet nature. Her mother, Chiquita Carradine, stood 
before mourners and called Alaysha "my guardian angel."

Another killing

Alaysha's killing didn't end what Alameda County District Attorney Nancy 
O'Malley described at the time as Williams' "complete disregard for human 
life." On Sept. 8, 2013, Williams allegedly shot and killed a man with whom he 
was "supposedly friends," 22-year-old Anthony Medearis, officials said. The 
slaying happened on the 1400 block of Eighth Street in Berkeley, in an alleged 
robbery attempt during a dice game.

Williams was arrested that day after police found him hiding in a shed, and 
Carroll was taken into custody in early 2014 after a wide-ranging probe that 
included Oakland and Berkeley police and state agents. At a preliminary hearing 
in the case, a witness testified that Williams told her he "didn't give a f-" 
about either killing.

Williams' prosecution is the 1st time the Alameda County District Attorney has 
sought capital punishment since 2012, when David Mills was sentenced to death 
for 3 2005 murders in East Oakland.

California's death row is the largest in the nation, with 743 condemned 
inmates. But only 13 prisoners have been executed since the death penalty was 
restored in the state more than 40 years ago, according to the Death Penalty 
Information Center, a research organization with a skeptical but formally 
neutral position on capital punishment.

Corrections officials proposed a new 1-drug execution protocol last year in an 
effort to conform to U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel's 2006 ruling that the 
state's 3-drug lethal injection method created "undue and unnecessary risk that 
an inmate will suffer pain so extreme that it offends the Eighth Amendment." 
Fogel concluded that California's "implementation of lethal injection is 
broken."

State officials are working on a new death-penalty protocol that would involve 
using 1 of 4 barbiturates and, in theory at least, would conform to the judge's 
ruling. But even if the new method is approved, it will likely be years before 
executions resume.

Opponent's concerns

Beyond the problems with the drugs involved, Stallworth said, his experience, 
including a case in which he sought the death penalty for a murder suspect, 
ultimately led him to reject capital punishment after he concluded it wasn't a 
deterrent and was applied haphazardly.

The duration of such trials, which can often last months, means there's a 
higher chance of seating juries consisting of people who can afford the time 
off. The end result, Stallworth contends, is that wealthier and more 
conservative jurors are picked to enforce the death penalty.

Even when a capital sentence is imposed, inmates can spend decades on death row 
awaiting execution due to the mandatory appeals process, often delaying 
indefinitely any gratification garnered by a victim's family.

That delay has led McGann, who said she is in favor of the death penalty but 
admits to being conflicted on the issue, to be careful when she's talking to 
loved ones of victims.

"When someone takes 1 of yours, you want nothing more than to take from them," 
she said. "But I don't tell people to expect that, because it just takes 
forever."

(source: San Francisco Chronicle)

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

Quin Denvir to Gov. Jerry Brown: Commute all death row sentences


Quin Denvir, long an opponent of the death penalty and one of the lawyers who 
steered Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski around probable execution, has asked Gov. 
Jerry Brown to commute the sentences of California's death row prisoners.

In a letter to the governor dated March 17, Denvir said he has "been haunted by 
the death penalty" since 1977, when it was reinstated in California and Denvir 
was appointed state public defender by Brown during his 1st term as governor.

"I have represented several death row inmates who were able to avoid execution, 
and I lost one, Tom Thompson," Denvir said in the letter. "He was very likely 
innocent of capital murder, and his case has been chronicled by (9th U.S. 
Circuit) Judge (Stephen) Reinhardt as a miscarriage of justice.

"Now, in Pope Francis' Year of Mercy, I would like to see California stop its, 
as (U.S. Supreme Court) Justice (Harry) Blackmun put it, tinkering with the 
machinery of death.

"I would respectfully ask you to exercise your gubernatorial clemency power to 
commute the sentences of the women and men on death row to life without 
possibility of parole," Denvir wrote.

Brown's office confirmed it had received the letter, but declined to comment.

The office holder's clemency power is not wholly unrestricted. The California 
Constitution says the governor may not grant a pardon or commutation to a 
person "twice convicted of a felony except on recommendation of the Supreme 
Court, 4 judges concurring."

The criminal justice system is an imperfect one.

Denvir, 75, is a revered figure in America's anti-death penalty community. 
After leaving state service in 1984, he practiced criminal defense at the trial 
and appellate levels. The 9th Circuit appointed him federal defender for the 
Eastern District of California in 1996, where he defended complex and 
high-profile prosecutions and argued landmark cases before the U.S. Supreme 
Court.

While heading the federal defender's office, he established a death penalty 
habeas unit and staffed it with highly qualified attorneys. Habeas corpus is a 
post-appeal recourse that allows a defendant to petition the court on a claim 
of unlawful detention.

Denvir and Judy Clarke, who has defended a number of high-profile cases 
throughout the country in which prosecutors were seeking the death penalty, 
teamed in Kaczynski's case. In return for the government's withdrawal of its 
request for death, Kaczynski reluctantly pleaded guilty to a years-long bombing 
campaign that killed three and injured 29, and was sentenced to life in prison 
without the possibility of release.

"In my opinion, Quin Denvir walks on water," Clarke once told a Bee reporter.

Now retired and living in Davis, Denvir tackles a case now and then if it 
interests him in some way.

In his letter to Brown, he said that "the state should not make the moral 
choice to kill women and men because they themselves have killed."

"2nd," he said, "the criminal justice system is an imperfect one, administered 
by men and women with their human frailties and susceptibility to public 
pressure and political tides. We accept those imperfections when life is not at 
stake, but we should not when there is the great risk that the death sentence 
will be imposed, as it has been in the past, in an arbitrary, discriminatory or 
unreliable manner.

"I appreciate your listening to me," Denvir told the governor in the letter. "I 
hope and pray that you will see this as the right thing, something that you can 
and should do."

(source: Sacramento Bee)

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

Nevada County Memo: Community Discussion Panel at the Madelyn Helling Library


?Nevada County Reads & Writes will be hosting a community discussion panel 
6-7:30 p.m. Thursday, March 31 in the Gene Albaugh Community Room at the 
Madelyn Helling Library.

The panel will focus on bias in the judicial system and the death penalty, the 
major themes of the 2016 Nevada County Reads & Writes book selection, "Just 
Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption" by Bryan Stevenson. The panel will 
include a diverse group of community members and activists including District 
Attorney Cliff Newell, Interim Public Defender Keri Klein, author and Creating 
Community Beyond Bias member Bill Drake, activist Jamal Walker, government 
teacher Jeff Dellis, Nevada Union Social Justice Club representative Junet 
Bedayn, and death penalty abolition activist Amanda Wilcox.

(source: The Union)






USA:

Federal Appeals Court Ruling Could Accelerate Death-Row Executions


A contentious Justice Department policy that could speed up death-row 
executions is closer to taking effect, following a recent federal appeals court 
ruling.

The opinion last week from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could clear 
the way for states to apply for a program to fast-track death-row appeals, 
potentially leading to swifter executions. Death-penalty supporters have been 
calling for speedier appeals for years, while defense lawyers and death-penalty 
opponents say fairness is lost if complicated appeals aren't given the time 
they need.

The controversy over the policy comes as the use of the death penalty continues 
a yearslong decline. In 2015, 28 people were executed, the lowest number since 
1991, according to a study by the Death Penalty Information Center. Roughly 
3,000 inmates sat on death row at the beginning of the year, and 31 states 
currently allow executions.

The Ninth Circuit tossed a 2013 lawsuit brought by the Habeas Corpus Resource 
Center in California and the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the 
District of Arizona.

The suit challenged a Justice Department policy that in certain states would 
shorten the amount of time - from 1 year to 6 months - in which prisoners must 
challenge their conviction in federal court after state appeals end. The 
fast-track process also would impose deadlines on federal courts for ruling on 
challenges, known as habeas corpus petitions. There currently are no limits on 
how quickly the courts must rule on such petitions.

The plaintiffs, which represent death-row inmates in federal appeals, had 
argued the Justice Department regulations were too vague and caused the groups 
concern over how to commit limited attorney time and financial resources in 
capital cases. But the court sided with the Justice Department, finding the 
plaintiffs failed to show they had been directly harmed. "Assisting and 
counseling clients in the face of legal uncertainty is the role of lawyers," 
the 3-judge panel wrote.

Opponents worry the policy will shortchange death-row inmates. "At a time when 
capital punishment is coming under serious scrutiny, we think there needs to be 
greater opportunities for courts to review these cases," said Marc Shapiro, an 
attorney for the plaintiffs. "DOJ is seeking to do exactly the opposite, and 
slide the cases through federal court."

The Justice Department, which has stood by the fast-track process and argued 
that any legal challenge to the policy was premature, declined to comment on 
the opinion. Mr. Shapiro said his clients plan to request a full Ninth Circuit 
panel to hear the case. Until the court takes up or denies that request, 
implementation of the fast-track policy continues to be on hold. Any further 
appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court could also delay enactment.

No states have yet been approved to use the fast-track process - put into law 
in 1996 through the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and revised 
by the Justice Department in 2013 - though Arizona and Texas have both asked to 
be allowed to use it. To qualify, states must show they provide competent 
counsel to indigent prisoners during state post-conviction proceedings.

Executions are often delayed for years as inmates pursue several rounds of 
appeals at both the state and federal level. Federal appeals of death-row 
sentences are a last resort and typically must challenge a constitutional or 
federal issue, rather than revisit the underlying facts of the case.

More than 1/3 of those sentenced to death between 1976 and 2013 had their 
sentences or convictions reversed through state or federal appeals, according 
to a study from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

(source: Daily News)