[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, FLA., Neb., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 24


TEXAS:

She watched her husband get sentenced to death. Now she's becoming a lawyer to 
save him and others.


When her boyfriend Juan Balderas was sentenced to death in March 2014, Yancy 
Escobar Balderas couldn't understand what was happening. She sobbed 
uncontrollably as the lawyers she believes failed her soon-to-be husband walked 
out of the courtroom.

2 1/2 years later, on a Saturday earlier this month, Yancy sat in a classroom 
at the University of Houston, dressed in a smart suit, holding her new, 
hard-earned paralegal certificate. Yancy - a 29-year-old immigrant from El 
Salvador who is the 1st from her family to graduate from high school - is 
turning her experience of marrying a death row inmate into a powerful 
motivation to become a lawyer and help defend other people facing capital 
punishment.

"After sitting through this trial, seeing the injustices in Juan's case, I want 
to do something where I can make a change in the system, in people's lives," 
she told me this week.

Yancy and Juan, who went to the same middle school, started dating when they 
were 14 and 15. Her family emigrated from El Salvador, and she was undocumented 
when she was brought to the U.S. at age 6. (She's now a U.S. citizen.)

Theirs was a pretty typical childhood romance: Yancy remembers holding Juan's 
hand in church, and him getting all dressed up to meet her mother. "We would 
just talk every day on the phone, and he would always try extra to make me 
happy," she said. "He was my best friend."

The 2 grew up in a rough neighborhood on the edge of Houston's suburban sprawl. 
Juan, who had done time in juvenile detention, was involved with a street gang 
of 18- and 19-year-olds known as La Tercera Crips. Yancy says he was trying to 
avoid the group, go to college, and move on with his life - but he wasn't able 
to escape.

On December 16, 2005, when Juan was 19, he was arrested as part of a larger 
raid picking up seven alleged gang members who police said were behind a string 
of shootings. He was charged with murder, accused of gunning down 16-year-old 
Eduardo Hernandez in a bleak apartment complex near an expressway.

When she first heard that her boyfriend was arrested, Yancy was reeling. "I was 
in disbelief," she said. Because she didn't own a car, she had to take 3 buses 
to get to the Harris County jail in downtown Houston to visit him. He said he 
was innocent, and she stood with him.

Juan and Yancy waited and waited as his trial date kept getting pushed back. 
The trial didn't actually begin until January 2014 - an extraordinary 8 years 
after he was arrested, all spent behind bars. The case was delayed because of 
his lawyer getting sick, changes in judges and prosecutors, and a 
back-and-forth while the district attorney decided whether or not to seek the 
death penalty. Moreover, Harris County was facing a backlog of more than 1,000 
criminal cases.

While Juan was waiting for a trial, according to court documents, his brother 
committed suicide and he wasn't allowed to attend his funeral. Before he was 
arrested, he was preparing to go to college and study art. Instead, he spent 
the equivalent of 2 college degrees incarcerated without being convicted of 
anything.

Once the trial finally began, Yancy quit her job and stopped going to her 
community college classes because she couldn't concentrate. She attended Juan's 
trial every day for 2 months, sitting behind him, filled with nerves.

Juan's court-appointed lawyer was Jerome Godinich, who has been reprimanded by 
a federal appeals court for missing deadlines and failing to file appeals in 
other death penalty cases. A 2009 investigation by the Houston Chronicle found 
that he represented more criminal clients than any other court-appointed 
attorney in the county. Between 2006 and 2009, he represented 21 different 
defendants facing the death penalty - a caseload that legal experts say makes 
it almost impossible to provide sufficient representation.

Godinich and his 2nd chair attorney didn't even meet with Juan until just 
before the trial, and conducted almost no investigation, Yancy said.

According to Pat Hartwell (an anti-death penalty activist who attended the 
trial and befriended Yancy), at times during jury deliberations, neither of 
Juan's lawyers were present while the judge and prosecutors responded to 
questions from the jury by themselves. Hartwell said that when she confronted 
Godinich, he told her, "I have another trial to take care of." (Godinich did 
not respond to a request for comment.)

On March 14, 2014, the jury sentenced Juan to death. When the foreman read the 
verdict, "I didn't know what was going on," Yancy told me. "A few jurors were 
crying, but it was not clicking in my head. Then it became clear to me, the 
decision - I guess I cried so much, my nose was bleeding."

2 weeks after the sentence, the couple decided to get married. They had talked 
about it before, but now they rushed to get it done before Juan was transferred 
to death row prison, where at the time new marriages were prohibited.

The 2 stood in an austere visiting room in the Harris County jail, with Yancy 
in a white dress with her hair done up and Juan in his bright yellow inmate 
jumpsuit. The jail minister married them while Juan's two sisters, Hartwell, 
and Yancy's boss looked on. "We felt like little kids all over again," Yancy 
said. The next day, Juan was taken to death row.

For the past 2 1/2 years, Yancy has made the 2-hour drive to the state's death 
row prison in West Livingston just about every Thursday or Friday, talking to 
Juan through the thick glass panels of the visiting booths. Inmates there 
aren't allowed to make phone calls, so the couple send handwritten letters back 
and forth.

It was Juan, she said, who encouraged her to go back to school; she has an 
associate degree and is currently working on her bachelor's at the University 
of Houston. Inspired by how powerless she felt during Juan's trial, she decided 
she wanted to become a lawyer, and finished a 3-month paralegal course on Oct. 
1.

The intensive course was tough, she said, and she had to stay up late studying 
legal theories and case law. For one assignment, she was assigned to be a 
defense attorney for a mock trial, and Juan helped her write her opening 
statement. When she told him she got her certificate, "he was so proud of me," 
she said. "Throughout the whole course, he was always motivating me. I do this 
for him, for me, for our future."

She recently started as a paralegal intern for Gregory Gardner, a lawyer who's 
helped other Texas death row inmates win stays of execution. Yancy's personal 
experience helps make her good at her job, he said. "She's hungry to learn 
more," Gardner told me. "Her attention to detail is just incredible, she's 
really smart and dedicated - she's going to be very successful at this."

She's also volunteered with the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty 
and other advocacy groups. Earlier this year, she traveled to Austin with other 
activists to meet state lawmakers, share her and Juan's story, and lobby them 
against capital punishment.

Meanwhile, Juan's case is progressing through several appeals. His new 
attorneys point to the fact that the only eyewitness to the shooting who 
identified Juan at the trial - the sister of the victim's girlfriend - gave 
police officers conflicting statements.

Several other members of the alleged gang, including the man whom Yancy 
believes is the real murderer, also got deals from the prosecutor where murder 
charges against them were reduced to much lower charges in exchange for 
testifying against Juan, according to court documents. In addition, the lawyers 
argue, the 8-year delay between Juan's arrest and his trial violated his Sixth 
Amendment right to a speedy trial.

Because of conflict of interest rules, Yancy might not be able to represent 
Juan if she does become a lawyer. But she knows his case better than anyone, 
and is working with his lawyers to help plan the appeal strategy. She's hopeful 
that he'll get a new trial, and dreams of the day they can be together again 
after 11 years.

For now, she wants to use her experience to help other people on death row, 
especially families like hers that can't afford high-priced attorneys. At 
Gardner's law firm, she recently started working on her 1st case as a paralegal 
intern: a death penalty appeal.

"I'm just blessed to have this opportunity," she said. "To me, it's not just 
work ... There's someone waiting to die and they've got all this hope on us. We 
could save their lives."

(soruce: fusion.net)






FLORIDA:

Florida AG Bondi wants Supreme Court to clarify death ruling


Attorney General Pam Bondi, warning that murder trials across the state could 
be placed in limbo, has asked the Florida Supreme Court to clarify a sweeping 
death penalty ruling it handed down last week.

In 2 linked cases, the court first concluded that death sentences must require 
a unanimous jury and then struck down a newly enacted law that allowed a 
defendant to be sentenced to death as long as 10 of 12 jurors recommended it.

In the rulings, the court made it clear that it was not declaring the death 
penalty unconstitutional. But in the decision that struck down the new law, the 
court also stated that "the law could not be applied to pending prosecutions."

One of Bondi's senior attorneys, Carol Dittmar, filed a motion Thursday on 
behalf of the attorney general asking that the court revisit its decision, 
saying that the way the ruling was written "unnecessarily invites continued 
litigation."

"The language leaves open the possibility that defense attorneys will assert 
that no valid death penalty law exists in Florida," Dittmar wrote in the court 
filing, adding later that the court needed to clarify its ruling to "avoid any 
potential miscarriage of justice."

The motion by Bondi asserts that death penalty cases could proceed in Florida 
as long as juries were told they must reach a unanimous decision on whether to 
recommend capital punishment.

But Marty McClain, a long-standing death penalty attorney who filed a legal 
brief in one of the cases, said last week that it would be a risky move for 
prosecutors to proceed until the Florida Legislature rewrites the state's death 
sentencing law.

"I think at the moment that there's no statute in place for governing how to 
proceed," McClain said.

That means, however, it could be months before the issue is resolved. State 
legislators are scheduled to return to the Capitol next month for a 1-day 
organizational session, but the next regular session isn't until March.

Florida's death penalty law was upended as a result of a case involving Timothy 
Lee Hurst, who was convicted using a box-cutter to kill a co-worker at a 
Pensacola Popeye's restaurant in 1998. A jury had divided 7-5 over whether 
Hurst deserved the death penalty, but a judge imposed the sentence. The state 
Supreme Court initially upheld his sentence, but the U.S. Supreme Court this 
past January declared the state's death penalty sentencing law unconstitutional 
because it gave too much power to judges to make the ultimate decision.

That ruling led the state to halt two pending executions, and state legislators 
rushed to overhaul the law. They gave more sway to juries, including 
prohibiting a judge from imposing the death penalty if the jury recommended 
life in prison.

The Republican-controlled Legislature, however, rejected calls to require a 
unanimous decision from a jury, settling instead for a supermajority of 10 
jurors. Prosecutors were strongly opposed to requiring a unanimous jury 
decision, pointing out that some of the state's most notorious criminals 
including serial killer Ted Bundy did not receive a unanimous jury 
recommendation. An analysis prepared for the Legislature showed that only 21 
percent of death penalty sentences handed down over the past 15 years were 
recommended unanimously.

The Florida Supreme Court, however, last week vacated Hurst's death sentence 
and ordered a new sentencing hearing. In that decision, justices ruled that a 
unanimous jury decision was needed to keep the death penalty "constitutionally 
sound." The court struck down the state's new sentencing law in a case brought 
by Larry Darnell Perry, a St. Cloud man accused of killing his 3-month-old son 
in 2013.

(source: Associated press)






NEBRASKA:

Voters to decide death penalty issue


Nebraska voters have a chance to decide the oft-discussed matter of the death 
penalty.

The Nebraska Legislature voted in 2015 in favor of a bill (LB268) to repeal the 
death penalty as a means of punishment for the crime of first-degree murder and 
replace it with life in prison without parole. That action was vetoed by 
Governor Pete Ricketts and the Legislature overrode his veto.

Thus came the Referendum Ordered by Petition of the People and designated for 
the ballot as Referendum No. 426.

For the record, a referendum is the process by which the repeal or approval of 
an existing statute or state constitutional provision is voted upon. Such 
referenda are placed on the ballot by a required number of voter signatures on 
a petition filed with the Secretary of State.

That has led to what might seem to be confusing language for voters. As the 
Nebraska Attorney General explains it: "A vote to Retain will eliminate the 
death penalty and change the maximum penalty for the crime of murder in the 1st 
degree to life imprisonment by retaining Legislative Bill 268, passed in 2015 
by the First Session of the 104th Nebraska Legislature."

Likewise, "A vote to Repeal will keep the death penalty as a possible penalty 
for the crime of murder in the 1st degree by repealing Legislative Bill 268, 
passed in 2015 by the First Session of the 104th Nebraska Legislature."

How do you avoid the confusion? It would seem that retaining would mean keeping 
the death penalty and repealing would mean getting rid of it. But remember, the 
vote deals with the action of the Legislature. So retaining their action 
(abolition of the death penalty) would keep it off the books. Repealing their 
action (abolition of the death penalty) would restore it as a form of 
punishment.

The Nebraska Legislature debated the issue for 26 years, both in the Judiciary 
Committee and before the full voting body in the George W. Norris legislative 
chambers. The abolition had passed several times only to be vetoed by various 
governors. A federal stay on the death penalty was in effect for a few years. 
But it was in 2015 when the bill passed, was vetoed, and the veto overridden.

In the midst of the years of discussion, Nebraska executed 3 men in the 
electric chair. The first was Harold Lamont "Wili" Otey on Sept. 2, 1994. Then 
came John Joubert on July 17, 1996. Robert E. Williams was the last to be 
executed in Nebraska on Dec. 2, 1997.

(source: Beatrice Daily Sun)






USA:

2016 Could Have The Fewest Executions In The US In Decades----So far this year, 
17 prisoners have been executed by state authorities.


The U.S. is on track to execute the least number of death row inmates in 25 
years.

So far this year, 17 prisoners have been executed by state authorities, a 32 % 
drop from last year alone.

Part of the reason for the decline could be dwindling public support. Polls 
show just under 1/2 of Americans support the death penalty - its lowest level 
in over 40 years.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, capital punishment is 
allowed in 30 states. But just 4 states have been performing the majority of 
executions in recent years, and 3 of those states have put executions on hold.

Access to lethal injection drugs could be another cause of the decline. The 
drugs have been in short supply for years, forcing states to look for new 
combinations.

In Oklahoma, legal challenges to the state's drug combinations put a halt on 
executions.

In Florida, both the federal and state supreme courts effectively took away 
judges' ability to outweigh juries in giving death sentences.

And in Texas, executions have stalled over questions of racial bias, 
psychiatric testimony and tests for intellectual disability.

(source: WCBI news)

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

Executions fall along with support for the death penalty; is capital punishment 
nearing an end?


Only 17 people have been executed so far this year, a 32 % decline from the 
number of executions in the same period last year.

The drop in the number of executions comes as support for the death penalty 
wanes, the Wall Street Journal (sub. req. ) reports. Last year only 61 % of 
Americans favored the death penalty, compared with 80 % in 1994, according to a 
Gallup poll.

The Wall Street Journal attributes the slowdown primarily to three factors: the 
short supply of execution drugs; growing scrutiny of expert testimony and 
evidence; and the U.S. Supreme Court decision Hurst v. Florida, which held that 
jurors, rather than judges, must make findings on facts necessary to impose the 
death penalty.

In response to the decision, Florida passed a new law that allowed jurors to 
recommend the death penalty on a 10-2 vote. The Florida Supreme Court struck 
down the law on Oct. 14, saying that jurors must be unanimous in recommending 
the death penalty.

The New York Times notes the decline in executions and the Gallup poll in an 
op-ed that considers whether the death penalty is nearing its end. The article 
concludes capital punishment won???t be totally eliminated until there is a 
definitive ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The article points to recent dissents by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader 
Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor that expressed misgivings about the 
constitutionality of the death penalty.

In a post at his Sentencing Law and Policy blog, Ohio State University law 
professor Douglas Berman says the notion that the death penalty is collapsing 
"is largely a product of effective litigation by abolitionists and the work of 
courts, not really a reflection of a sea-change in public opinion or radical 
changes in the work of most legislatures and prosecutors in key regions of the 
United States."

He notes polls showing California voters are likely to support a referendum to 
make the death penalty in the state more efficient, that Ohio is working to 
resume executions and has scheduled executions for nearly 2 dozen inmates, that 
federal jurors in Massachusetts sentenced Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for the 
Boston Marathon bombings, and that federal prosecutors were eager to pursue the 
death penalty against alleged church shooter Dylann Roof.

(source: ABA Journal)

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

There Are Signs That the Death Penalty Is On the Way Out----The barbaric 
practice is receiving some of the fiercest public opposition in 40 years.


Hiding behind the waterfall of Trump coverage and the rise of hate in American 
politics, a cultural and legal silver lining is emerging, one that is agreed 
upon across party lines. Yes, despite the cheers that Trump receives for 
calling himself the law and order candidate, Americans may finally be ready to 
retire the death penalty. In its Monday editorial, the New York Times uncovers 
a pattern, in public opinion polls, in research, and most importantly, in the 
results of trials across the country that suggests that " Americans??? appetite 
for this barbaric practice diminishes with each passing year."

A September study from the Pew Charitable trust reveals that America's support 
for law is at it's lowest in 4 decades:

Only about half of Americans (49%) now favor the death penalty for people 
convicted of murder, while 42% oppose it. Support has dropped 7 % points since 
March 2015, from 56%. Public support for capital punishment peaked in the 
mid-1990s, when 8-in-10 Americans (80% in 1994) favored the death penalty and 
fewer than 2-in-10 were opposed (16%). Opposition to the death penalty is now 
the highest it has been since 1972.

More importantly, this shift in public opinion is reflected in courtrooms 
across the country, with just 49 new death sentences in 2015, the lowest since 
1976 when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of capital punishment. The decline 
in death sentences may also have to do with the loss of overzealous prosecutors 
in the most capital punishment-friendly counties. The Times points out that 
prosecutors in Duval County, Florida and Caddo Parrish, Louisiana lost recent 
elections "at least partly due to voters' concerns about their stance on the 
death penalty." The editorial cautions readers not to rest easy however, with 
the notion that those who do die by the state's hand are the worst of the worst 
criminals, or those who deserve it the most. In fact, "In fact the crimes of 
the people sentenced to death are no worse than those of many others who escape 
that fate."

The anti-death penalty momemtum continued statewide in Florida, when the 
Florida Supreme Court overturned a law that allowed unanimous juries to impose 
death sentences which increases the chance that both innocent people and 
defendants with mental disabilities will be spared the ultimate penalty. 
California voters will soon have the opportunity to decide whether to eliminate 
capital punishment completely.

Of course, getting the death penalty eliminated on a state by state, or ballot 
by ballot basis, would be slow and cumbersome. More effective would be a 
Supreme Court ruling, and the editorial points to 3 justices, Stephen Breyer, 
Sonia Sotomayor, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg who have expressed "misgivings" about, 
if not outright opposition to, capital punishment.

America may now be preoccupied with the results of the presidential electoral 
circus, but it will be over in less than three weeks. When we can finally focus 
on something else, it will be, as the Times Editorial Board so succinctly puts 
it, it is long past time for the court to send this morally abhorrent practice 
to its oblivion."

(source: Ilana Novick is an AlterNet contributing writer and production 
editor----alternet.org)