[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., ALA., COLO., CALIF., ORE.

[Rick Halperin]

May 10



FLORIDA:

Defense to file 30 death penalty motions in James Rhodes case----Man accused of 
killing 20-year-old cellphone store clerk set for trial in August


Defense attorneys for a man accused of gunning down a Metro PCS clerk in 2013 
will present about 30 motions to the court regarding the death penalty before 
the trial begins in August.

James Rhodes' public defender has repeatedly tried to get the state to accept a 
plea deal with Rhodes that would take the death penalty off the table. Police 
said that after several hours of questioning, Rhodes confessed.

Police said Farah was found dead after officers responded to a report of an 
armed robbery at the store on Main Street near 21st Street.

Police said Rhodes pointed a gun at the 20-year-old and demanded money. They 
said she cooperated and after she handed him the last bit of money, he fired 4 
rounds, killing her.

In March, Judge Tatiana Salvador set Aug. 29 as the date for jury selection in 
the trial. The final pretrial date will be Aug. 22.

There will be a pretrial hearing at 1:30 pm. July 11 to discuss dozens of 
motions by the defense regarding the death penalty.

Rhodes' trial had been set to begin May 2, but it was pushed back because of 
new state legislation on the death penalty.

Gov. Rick Scott signed into law in March a measure designed to fix the state's 
death penalty sentencing process after it was found unconstitutional by the 
U.S. Supreme Court.

The new law, which went into effect immediately, would require at least 10 
jurors to recommend death for the penalty to be imposed.

(source: news4jax.com)






ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama judge denies stay of execution for death row inmate Vernon Madison


In an order issued Monday evening and filed in online court records Tuesday, 
Mobile County Circuit Judge Robert H. Smith dismissed Madison's petition 
seeking a stay of execution.

The judge noted in the order that the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals is 
currently reviewing the state's death penalty statute, in light of the U.S. 
Supreme Court's Hurst v. Florida decision.

Attorneys for an Alabama death row inmate are asking a judge to stay his 
execution set for Thursday and resentence him to life without parole based on 
recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

Vernon Madison, now 65, was charged and convicted in the April 18, 1985, 
slaying of police Officer Julius Schulte, who was responding to a domestic 
disturbance call.

He had 3 trials because state appellate courts twice sent the case back to 
Mobile County, 1st for a violation based on race-based jury selection and later 
based on improper testimony from an expert witness for the prosecution.

He was convicted in a 3rd trial in 1994. The jury then recommended a sentence 
of life without parole, but Mobile County Circuit Judge Ferrill McRae overrode 
the decision and sentenced him to death.

In January, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hurst v. Florida that Florida's 
scheme allowing judges to override a jury's sentencing recommendation in death 
penalty cases was unconstitutional. The decision prompted Florida's legislature 
to rewrite its capital punishment sentencing law.

Alabama has a similar sentencing scheme, though the attorney general's office 
has noted that it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1995.

In another ruling issued May 2, the Supreme Court granted review of the case of 
Alabama death row inmate Bart Johnson. It was the 1st Alabama case challenging 
the state's capital murder sentencing scheme to be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme 
Court since Hurst was decided.

Attorneys from the Montgomery-based Equal Justice Initiative represent both 
Johnson and Madison.

They argue that the Johnson decision is critical to Madison's case. That 
ruling, handed down after Madison's execution date was set, has "raised 
fundamental questions about the constitutionality of the use of judicial 
override in Alabama," they argue.

"This ruling implicates all (capital) cases in Alabama," Bryan Stevenson, 
founder and executive director of EJI, said last week. "We have argued that 
Alabama's statute no longer conforms to current constitutional requirements. 
The Court's ruling today supports that view."

The attorney general argues that the Johnson decision "does not strike down or 
invalidate Alabama's death penalty sentencing scheme," but instead orders a 
state appellate court to reconsider the facts of that specific case in light of 
Hurst.

"Alabama's current death-penalty statute, under which Madison was sentenced, 
has never been struck down by the United States Supreme Court," state attorneys 
argue in court documents.

On May 5, Madison's attorneys asked the Alabama Supreme Court to not only stay 
his execution but also reconsider the state's death penalty sentencing scheme 
in light of the decisions.

The attorney general opposed the stay and argued that Madison's claim must 
first be made in circuit court, under Alabama law.

On May 6, the Alabama Supreme Court denied Madison's request.

His attorneys put forth the same arguments in a petition filed Monday in Mobile 
County Circuit Court. They say his death sentence is unconstitutional, in light 
of the Hurst and Johnson rulings, and ask Judge Robert H. Smith to resentence 
him to life without parole.

"Because Alabama's death penalty sentencing scheme has exactly the same defect 
that was declared unconstitutional in Hurst, it is no longer viable," they 
wrote in the filing. "More specifically, there is a serious question as to 
whether Alabama's judicial override system can sustain when the very precedent 
upon which it is based has been overruled by Hurst."

The attorney general countered with several filings arguing that the appeal was 
filed outside the 1-year window after the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals 
entered its judgment in July 1998, and that the claim could have been raised on 
direct appeal.

Madison, who has been on death row since Nov. 12, 1985, is one of Alabama's 
longest-serving death row inmates.

Over the years, he has filed numerous state and federal appeals that have been 
denied, including denials by the Alabama Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme 
Court to review the case.

During an April 14 competency hearing, testimony showed that Madison has had 
several strokes and suffers from serious dementia. His severe mental decline 
rendered him incompetent to be executed, his attorneys argued.

Smith later issued a ruling denying the stay of execution.

Last week, Madison's attorneys filed a request for an emergency stay in U.S. 
District Court in the Southern District of Alabama.

Attorneys for the state filed a response asking the federal court to allow the 
execution to go forward as scheduled. They say Madison did not exhaust his 
state appeals before filing the federal petition and that his attorneys have 
not proven he lacks a rational understanding of the state's move to execute 
him.

(source: al.com)






COLORADO:

Competency hearing to resume for accused Colorado clinic gunman


The man who proclaimed himself a "warrior for the babies" after a fatal 
shooting spree at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado last year was due 
back in court on Tuesday for the continuation of a hearing on his mental state.

During a daylong hearing last month, 2 state psychologists testified that their 
evaluation of Robert Lewis Dear, 58, found him delusional and unfit to stand 
trial for the Colorado Springs rampage that left 3 dead and 9 wounded.

El Paso County judge Gilbert Martinez ordered the mental evaluation of Dear in 
December after the South Carolina native insisted on firing his attorney and 
representing himself in a case stemming from the first fatal attack on a U.S. 
abortion provider since 2009.

Dear, who has insisted he is competent, declared himself guilty and a "warrior 
for the babies" in previous courtroom outbursts.

If Martinez rules Dear unfit - meaning he is incapable of understanding the 
proceedings and assisting in his own defense - the case will be suspended and 
he will be sent back to a state hospital where doctors will seek to restore him 
to competency.

The 1st of 2 psychologists to testify on April 28, Jackie Grimmett, said Dear 
appeared to be suffering from a delusional disorder, possessing a factual but 
not rational understanding of the criminal proceedings.

Her colleague, B. Thomas Gray, concurred that Dear was delusional, saying the 
defendant "intends to plead guilty unless God tells him differently."

A police detective who took the stand recounted Dear telling police after his 
arrest that he believed he was being followed by 10 federal agents the day of 
the shooting.

As the proceeding wore on, Dear repeatedly interjected, at one point telling 
the judge, "If you find me incompetent, I'll know you're with them."

Dear has been held without bond since surrendering at the end of a bloody 
5-hour siege on Nov. 27 at the Planned Parenthood center, where police said he 
opened fire outside the building then stormed inside.

Among those killed were 2 people who happened to be in the clinic's waiting 
area - a U.S. Army veteran and a mother of two - as well as a police officer.

Dear, charged with 1st degree murder, attempted murder and assault, has not 
formally entered a plea. Prosecutors have yet to say whether they intend to 
seek the death penalty if he were convicted.

(source: Reuters)






CALIFORNIA:

Our Fears Confirmed: Proposed Lethal Injection Regulations Fraught with Deep 
and Troubling Flaws


On Nov. 6, 2015, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 
(CDCR) published proposed regulations for its new single-drug lethal injection 
protocol. This triggered an important opportunity for the public to comment in 
accordance with California's Administrative Procedures Act. In order to give 
the public a chance to provide meaningful comment, the ACLU had previously 
submitted Public Records Act (PRA) requests to obtain information. The CDCR, 
however, refused to produce the records, forcing us to go to court.

After several extensions and months of withholding the records, the court ruled 
in March that the CDCR must disclose more than 800 documents (approximately 
12,000 pages). The agency still refused and opted to extend the public comment 
period in order to continue litigating the case.

Finally, last week, the CDCR exhausted all legal remedies and was forced to 
turn documents over. The documents can be viewed in this file.

The documents provide a wealth of information about the CDCR's development of 
its proposed lethal injection protocol. An initial review of the documents 
confirms the ACLU's concerns about deep, troubling flaws in the proposed 
regulations. For example, the CDCR's regulatory notice vastly understates the 
true cost of resuming executions. In addition, the regulations fail to explain 
how CDCR will acquire the lethal injection drugs, or to set forth any protocols 
that will ensure the acquisition does not violate federal and state laws 
governing controlled substances. Finally, the regulations contain no safeguards 
to prevent gruesome botched executions in California, as have occurred all too 
often in other states.

The newly released documents corroborate our concerns about the proposed 
regulations and demonstrate, among other things, the following:

1. The CDCR grossly understates the cost of procuring drugs.

In the proposed regulatory package, the CDCR stated that the cost of procuring 
drugs will be around $4,193 per execution, based on the need for 60 grams per 
execution and the cost of a previous purchase of sodium thiopental. But the new 
documents reveal that the CDCR knows it may have to spend much more. 1 email 
states that a particular compounding pharmacy will charge the CDCR $500,000 for 
an initial 200 gram order - or $2,500 per gram. Another email discusses a 
source that proposed to charge $1,109 for 500mg (or half a gram) of 
pentobarbital (one of the drugs in the proposed regulations) - or $2,218 per 
gram. At these prices, the drugs for each execution (60 grams) would cost CDCR 
between $133,080 and $150,000, not $4,193. These documents clearly demonstrate 
that the CDCR's fiscal analysis radically understates the true cost of the 
proposed regulations.

2. CDCR has been unrepentant about flouting federal law and considered 
importing foreign drugs, again.

In 2012, the FDA demanded that CDCR return its supply of imported sodium 
thiopental because the FDA determined that the CDCR's supply was illegal. The 
CDCR responded to the FDA's demand by refusing to surrender its stash of 
illegal drugs, blatantly ignoring this command by a federal agency.

Shockingly, the documents reveal that the CDCR again considered acquiring drugs 
from foreign sources, even after the FDA demanded in 2012 that it surrender its 
illegal, foreign-manufactured drugs. Included in the documents is an email from 
the CDCR's lethal injection consultant to a key CDCR attorney providing 
information about an online company in the UK that supplies Nembutal 
(Pentobarbitol), one of the drugs authorized for use in the proposed 
regulations. In the email, the consultant writes: "We could do it again ..."

CDCR has simply refused to acknowledge that it has run afoul of federal drug 
laws in the past, making the lack of safeguards to ensure legal compliance in 
the proposed regulations all the more worrying. For example, a key CDCR 
attorney in charge of developing the CDCR's regulations wrote in 2014: "CA is 
the only state that did everything properly via the FDA and DEA for importation 
and acquisition." This is a remarkable statement in light of CDCR's stubborn 
flouting of the FDA's 2012 demand to hand over its illegal supply of lethal 
injection drugs.

3. CDCR considered very troubling drug sources.

It is critical that CDCR acquire an FDA-approved product through lawful 
distribution channels. History demonstrates that states have run afoul of 
federal controlled substances laws in acquiring lethal injection drugs. (A 
federal court of appeals previously enjoined the importation and release of 
unapproved foreign-manfactured lethal injection drugs.) Yet the consultant 
retained by CDCR specifically to help develop its lethal injection protocol 
proposed a number of troubling sources, including an online pharmacy that 
boasts about offering "cheap" pentobarbital without a prescription and a 
compounding pharmacy that specializes in prescriptions for animals. The FDA has 
been cracking down on online pharmacies that sell controlled substances without 
a prescription, because they essentially sell illegal drugs for illicit use.

4. CDCR officials dismissed the seriousness of botched executions in other 
states and demonstrated a troubling indifference to their possibility in 
California.

When the current proposed regulations and corresponding rulemaking file were 
issued in November of 2015, we were concerned that they failed to outline 
procedures that could prevent botched executions in California. In addition, it 
was clear that the CDCR failed to study botched executions in states like 
Arizona, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Georgia.

Documents show that CDCR officials not only failed to study botched executions 
elsewhere, they denied that gruesome executions in other states were, in fact, 
botched. For example, the CDCR attorney tasked with overseeing the development 
of the regulations commented that news coverage of a horrific execution in 
Ohio, in which an inmate gasped for air for 25 minutes, was just "a big hoopla" 
and "beyond ridiculous." She dismissed media reports, insisting that "[w]hat 
they witnessed was snoring." In addition, the consultant forwarded to CDCR a 
news article of a botched execution in Florida that included graphic photos of 
chemical burns and extensive "skin slippage" on the inmate's body. Commenting 
"I do not know where or how they got these pictures!", the consultant 
apparently harbored deep concerns that the media was able to secure photos, but 
expressed none about what actually happened to the inmate. The CDCR's response 
to the news article similarly reflected no concern about what happened in 
Florida or how to prevent the same tragedy in California.

California has a sordid history with the death penalty, which CDCR has only 
exacerbated by aggressively fighting to keep secret its activities related to 
lethal injection. As the ACLU and as members of the public, we must continue to 
demand government transparency and accountability. Government abuses of power 
when it comes to the death penalty are completely unacceptable.

(source: Linda Lye is a senior staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern 
California. Ana Zamora is the ACLU of Northern California's Criminal Justice 
Policy Director----aclunc.org)






OREGON:

Death Penalty Affirmed for Oregon Bomb-Makers


A father-son duo who killed two police officers in a 2008 bank bombing had 
their convictions and death penalties upheld by the Oregon Supreme Court.

Joshua Turnidge and his father, Bruce, were each convicted of aggravated murder 
for the bombing at a bank in Woodburn.

As quoted in the May 5 decision, a Wells Fargo teller who answered the phone on 
Dec. 12, 2008, heard a voice say, "If you value your life and the life of your 
employees, you need to [redacted] get out because I'm going to kill you, you 
[redacted] are all going to die."

The caller told the teller to evacuate the bank and pick up a cell phone left 
outside in a plastic bag for further instructions. The teller called 911 and 
the police and bomb squad arrived.

They found the phone and determined it was not an explosive device.

However, the caller had also mentioned a similar attack on a nearby West Coast 
Bank branch. A detective found a large metal box in the bushes there.

When the bank and landscaper said they were not familiar with the box, the bomb 
squad was called to the scene. Trooper William Hakim of the Oregon State Police 
called the box "a very good hoax device."

It was a rainy day, and the bank had closed. Hakim took the device inside the 
bank to dismantle it. He used a hammer and crowbar to open the box.

"There, I got it," he said.

1 second later, the box exploded.

Hakim and Capt. Thomas Tennant of the Woodburn Police Department died. 2 other 
officers were injured, with 1 losing his right leg.

Investigators learned where the bombers bought the TracPhones and airtime 
cards. A Wal-Mart surveillance video led the police to a license-bureau photo 
of Joshua Turnidge.

After arresting Joshua, police searched his father Bruce's property. They found 
tools in the pole barn that could have been used to build the bomb.

Investigators learned from the Turnidges' friends and associates that Bruce had 
spoken in the past about bank robbery scenarios, including the use of 
explosives as a diversion.

A friend of the younger Turnidge said that many years earlier, Joshua had told 
him that he had called in a bomb threat to a bank that was near the 2 banks 
involved in the explosion.

In addition, Joshua's former fianc???e said that he and his father had reacted 
in a "jubilant" manner to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

Also, at the time of the Oregon bombing, the Turnidges' biodiesel business was 
not turning a profit.

During the trial, Joshua testified that his father had planned, constructed and 
detonated the bomb. Bruce did not testify in his defense.

The trial court convicted both Turnidges of aggravated murder, conspiracy, 
assault and unlawful manufacture and possession of a destructive device.

Both were sentenced to death, and the Oregon Supreme Court upheld the 
convictions in opinions written by Senior Justice Pro Tempore Virginia Linder.

Joshua argued that the trial court should have severed his trial from that of 
his father, but in her May 5 opinion, Linder stated that a joint trial was not 
"clearly inappropriate."

Also, Joshua stated that the destruction of jury questionnaires violated his 
due process rights. Linder disagreed.

"Both parties had an opportunity to object to the representation (to the 
jurors) that the questionnaires would be destroyed; neither party did," Linder 
noted.

She also refuted Joshua's argument that the trial court should not have 
admitted testimony about his previously phoned-in bomb threat to another bank. 
Linder wrote that the state sought to establish that the threat was a "trial 
run" for the bombing that took place 13 years later.

"That theory of logical relevance is bolstered in the context of other evidence 
that the state introduced, without objection, about defendant's prior 
statements about robbing banks," she stated.

The Turnidges' views were also relevant evidence, according to Linder.

"The fact that defendant held vehement anti-government, anti-establishment, and 
anti-law enforcement views supplied evidence of his motive for his 
participation in the ultimate explosion that killed and injured law enforcement 
officers," she wrote.

In a separate opinion confirming Bruce's conviction, Linder wrote that evidence 
of his views, which date back 30 years, were also properly admitted.

"Evidence of defendant's anti-government sentiments and activities, his desires 
to form anti-government militias, his celebration of the Oklahoma City bombing, 
and his infatuation with the idea of killing police officers at a police 
memorial all logically supported the state's theory of why defendant engaged in 
the bombing," she wrote.

The Turnidges did not challenge their death sentences, which the Oregon Supreme 
Court also affirmed. However, according to the Salem Statesman-Journal, Oregon 
has had a moratorium on executions since 2011.

(source: Courthousenews.com)