[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., VA., ALA., OHIO, UTAH, NEV.

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 27



TEXAS:

Murder suspect wears shock device at hearing


Crime lab testing and security measures were discussed at a hearing Friday for 
a Texas prison inmate accused of beating a correctional officer to death at the 
Barry Telford Unit in New Boston in 2015.

The state is seeking the death penalty for Billy Joel Tracy, 39, in the July 
15, 2015, murder of Timothy Davison, a 47-year-old correctional officer with 
less than a year on the job. The case has been set for monthly pretrial 
hearings by 102nd District Judge Bobby Lockhart in advance of jury selection, 
which is scheduled to begin in September.

At a hearing at the Bowie County courthouse Friday, Assistant District Attorney 
Kelley Crisp and Tracy's lead defense attorney, Mac Cobb of Mount Pleasant, 
Texas, discussed compliance with state law in death penalty cases concerning 
the testing of forensic evidence, such as DNA.

Crisp said the state, defense, and Lockhart met Feb. 17 at the district 
attorney's office with officials from the state's crime lab to discuss what 
must be tested. Crisp said she and Cobb agree they are in compliance with 
relevant Texas death penalty statutes.

Cobb addressed security measures in place Friday for Tracy that have been 
absent at earlier hearings. Additional personnel from the Texas Department of 
Criminal Justice were on hand and Tracy was outfitted with a device capable of 
delivering an electric shock via remote control.

At a hearing in January during which the court addressed motions from Tracy 
expressing dissatisfaction with Cobb, Tracy told the court that he could just 
assault Cobb if he wanted to make sure he was off the case. After discussing 
his options with Lockhart, Tracy agreed to continue with Cobb as his lead 
defender.

Cobb said he did not request the additional security. Crisp said her office was 
unaware of any changes until Friday's court hearing. Lockhart has repeatedly 
declined to interfere with or question the procedures and policies of TDCJ. Why 
TDCJ implemented the additional security Friday remains publicly unknown.

In a prior hearing, Lockhart promised Tracy he would allow him to speak if he 
chose. Tracy declined the offer Friday.

Tracy's trial may be more about determining punishment than whether or not he 
is guilty. The alleged capital murder is reportedly preserved on video 
surveillance footage from multiple angles.

Davison was walking Tracy back to his cell in administrative segregation from 
an hour of recreation in a prison day room when Tracy allegedly slipped a hand 
free of its cuff and attacked, according to a TDCJ critical incident report. 
After knocking Davison to the floor, Tracy grabbed Davison's metal tray slot 
bar and wielded it like a baseball bat to beat him before tossing Davison down 
a flight of stairs. The alleged assault was over in less than 2 minutes.

Before locking himself back into his cell, where Tracy had allegedly already 
packed his belongings in expectation of a transfer, Tracy allegedly threw the 
bar at an approaching group of guards and doused the air with Davison's pepper 
spray. Tray slot bars, which were only being used at a few Texas prisons in 
2015 and which have reportedly been phased out in favor of less dangerous, 
retrofitted equipment, were used to manipulate the rectangular openings in cell 
doors to allow the passing of meal trays, for example.

Tracy, 38, has a long history of violence both in and out of prison. He began 
serving two life sentences assessed in Rockwall County in August 1998, nearly 
18 years ago. Tracy was convicted of attacking a 16-year-old girl and of 
assaulting a police officer who attempted to take him into custody. Tracy has 
received additional sentences of 45 and 10 years for attacking guards at other 
Texas prisons.

"Offender Tracy had 49 major disciplinary convictions on file to include 
attempted escape, possession of contraband, possession of a weapon (multiple), 
staff assault with a weapon (multiple), offender assault with a weapon 
(multiple), tampering with a locking mechanism, refusing to obey orders, and 
creating a disturbance. His last major disciplinary was on April 22, 2014, for 
attempted escape," the report states.

If found guilty of capital murder in Davison's death, a jury will have 2 
sentencing options: life without the possibility of parole or death by lethal 
injection. Tracy's next pretrial hearing is March 17.

(source: Texarkana Gazette)

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

Inmate pleads guilty for Huntsville correctional officer's death


A man on trial for the death of a Texas Department of Criminal Justice 
correctional officer has pleaded guilty to capital murder.

In 2007, John Ray Falk Jr. exchanged gunfire with officer Susan Canfield during 
an attempted escape.

Canfield, who was on horseback, was killed after she was thrown from the horse.

Falk was later caught, along with another inmate who was executed in 2013 for 
his role in the escape attempt.

Falk's trial is being held at the Angelina County Courthouse in Lufkin.

It was moved on a change of venue request.

A jury will now decide if Falk will face life in prison of the death penalty.

(source: KBTX news)






PENNSYLVANIA:

Judge to hear death penalty case


A judge rather than a jury will hear the death penalty case against a Cambria 
County man in his girlfriend's stabbing death.

The (Johnstown) Tribune-Democrat reported that public defenders for David Leon 
Johnson, 37, requested the nonjury proceeding in Cambria County, and the 
commonwealth agreed.

District Attorney Kelly Callihan cited costs concerns, since jurors in capital 
cases are typically sequestered and housed in hotels to prevent outside 
influences.

Judge Patrick Kiniry will hear the case beginning March 9.

If he convicts Johnson of 1st-degree murder, he must then decide whether to 
impose capital punishment or life without parole.

Authorities allege that Johnson stabbed Allison Vaughn, 30, 3 times and 
strangled her in March 2015 for refusing to let him withdraw money from her 
bank account to buy drugs.

(source: Associated Press)






VIRGINIA:

Prosecution firm on death penalty in Ronald Hamilton trial


Lawyers for Ronald Hamilton are working frantically to keep the former Army 
staff sergeant off death row, as the 1-year anniversary of the shooting he is 
accused of committing draws near.

Prince William County Police have charged the 33-year-old with a series of 
crimes, including capital murder and 1st-degree murder, alleging that he shot 
and killed his 29-year-old wife, Crystal, at the couple's home on Lashmere 
Court in Woodbridge last February. Then, investigators believe he shot 3 police 
officers who responded to her 911 call for help, killing Officer Ashley Guindon 
and injuring Officers Jesse Hempen and David McKeown.

With a lengthy trial set for June, court documents show that Hamilton seems 
willing to admit his guilt, in exchange for Commonwealth's Attorney Paul Ebert 
agreeing to take the death penalty off the table. But prosecutors have so far 
been unwilling to consider that offer, pressing ahead with what could someday 
prove to be Prince William's 1st execution since 2010.

"Mr. Hamilton has offered to enter a guilty plea and to take a lengthy 
sentence, but the reality is that we're not at a point where that offer has 
moved forward with the other side," Edward Ungvarsky, an attorney for Hamilton 
with the state's capital defense program, told Prince William Circuit Court 
Judge Steven Smith in a Jan. 3 hearing. "While Mr. Hamilton acknowledges that 
he did the shooting, he also recognizes there are the possibilities of legal 
defenses."

Neither Ebert nor Hamilton's attorneys responded to requests for comment on the 
status of the case. The defense did file a 159-page motion asking that Smith 
strike the death penalty due to its historical "failure to deter violence,' but 
prosecutors argued that Virginia's Supreme Court has upheld capital punishment 
"innumerable times over a period of decades," and Smith denied the request Feb. 
13.

But if the case does eventually proceed to trial, then Hamilton's attorneys 
have filed a flurry of motions to improve their client's odds before a jury.

Though prosecutors claimed in previous filings that Hamilton admitted his guilt 
to police officers, his attorneys are pressing forward with the argument that 
he wasn't mentally fit to waive his constitutional rights when he made those 
confessions.

Chiefly, they argue that Hamilton suffered "traumatic experiences" during his 2 
yearlong tours of duty in Iraq and "suffers from mental health problems." The 
attorneys also question whether police ever appropriately delivered a "Miranda 
warning" to Hamilton, notifying him of his rights to counsel and against 
self-incrimination.

Smith ruled on Feb. 8 to appoint a psychologist to evaluate Hamilton's mental 
state, though the results of that work are forthcoming.

Hamilton's attorneys were less successful in getting a yearlong delay in when 
the case will actually go to trial. They were pressing that Smith move the case 
to June 2018, with Ungvarsky claiming that the matter is "extraordinarily 
complicated."

Ungvarsky alleged in a Jan. 3 hearing that Hamilton's attorneys "still haven't 
gotten all his Army records," and they're still missing a large number of 
discovery files from prosecutors as well.

"We can't just get ready in the next few months," Ungvarsky said. "We want a 
trial in which we're able to put our best foot forward in a zealous, efficient, 
diligent, constitutionally effective way to save his life."

But Ebert countered that he's aware of "no discovery issues" on his end, and 
Smith denied Ungvarsky's request, claiming the decision "puts pressure on both 
sides."

Moving forward, Hamilton's lawyers are renewing their efforts to bar the 
prosecution from using at trial any recordings of his calls during his stay in 
the Prince William-Manassas Regional Adult Detention Center.

The attorneys argue that Hamilton's discussed sensitive subjects like his 
faith, "the care of his son," his "despair and frustration at being kept in 
solitary confinement 23 hours per day" and his "deep regret and remorse" over 
the shooting, and using those calls as evidence would violate Hamilton's First 
and Fourth Amendment rights.

But judges have repeatedly denied similar arguments, prosecutors note, and they 
allege that there is a long-held standard of a "diminished expectation of 
privacy for inmates in a jail or prison facility."

Hamilton's lawyers are also asking Smith to suppress their client's statements 
to a mental health worker while he was incarcerated.

They expressed dismay in a motion that the prosecution managed to gain access 
to the sort of information they believe is protected under federal healthcare 
law, claiming that the Adult Detention Center "either intentionally broke the 
law when it provided those records to the commonwealth or the commonwealth 
obtained those records through improper back channels." Prosecutors have yet to 
file a response to those claims.

Smith is currently set to hear arguments on the last 2 motions March 8 in 
circuit court.

(source: insidenova.com)






ALABAMA:

Let juries make the final call on capital sentences


Imagine you're an Alabama judge - don your robe, grab your gavel and go sit in 
the big chair at the bench.

You've presided over a trial in which a defendant has been convicted in a 
particularly heinous capital murder case. The same jury that rendered that 
verdict also has given its recommendation for the defendant's punishment: life 
in prison without parole.

Alone among your peers in the U.S. judiciary, you can accept that 
recommendation or send the defendant to death row. It's your call.

You also must, to keep your job, regularly face the voters in a state whose 
ballot-casters are particularly cranky about crime. They generally want to lock 
criminals up and not just throw away the key but grind it into dust (confirmed 
by our bulging prisons), and are as adamant as the Red Queen in "Alice in 
Wonderland" about capital punishment.

What's going to be your motivation: justice or self-preservation?

Since 1976, according to the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama 
judges have rejected a jury's recommendation for life without parole in 112 
capital cases, and in all but 11 have levied death sentences. The last 
defendant put to death in Alabama had his sentence changed by a judge after the 
jury voted to send him to prison for life.

We can't climb into those judges' heads, past or present, and know exactly what 
they were thinking. They may sincerely have believed the defendants in question 
deserved society's ultimate penalty for their actions.

However, the question of death sentences being handed down for political 
reasons or to satisfy public opinion simply can't be erased from this scenario. 
That has fueled a push in the Legislature to take away judges' option to reject 
a jury's sentencing recommendation.

The Senate overwhelmingly - the margin was 30-1 - passed a bill to do that. A 
companion bill has cleared a House committee. We hope the Legislature puts 
together a consensus bill that becomes law.

Support for the change is bipartisan - this isn't a Democratic vs. Republican 
or liberal vs. conservative situation.

We doubt anyone would speak on the record, but the Senate bill's sponsor, Sen. 
Dick Brewbaker, R-Montgomery, said judges he's spoken to have almost 
universally told him (a.) they wish the override option would go away and (b.) 
they have felt public and political pressure to impose death sentences.

We're sure there will be shrieks about being "soft on crime." We don't see how 
that's the case when defendants have been convicted and the only question is 
their punishment. Given what we said about the mood toward criminals in this 
state, we expect Alabama juries to continue recommending a lot of death 
sentences.

The thing is, those sentences, just like the resolution of guilt vs. innocence, 
will be decided by the defendant's peers, not by one individual with people 
breathing down his or her neck.

(source: Editorial, Gadsden Times)






OHIO:

Long execution process is wrong


DEAR EDITOR:

I read in today's edition of the Tribune that a federal court will review the 
constitutionality of Ohio's execution policy.

In my opinion, this lengthy, drawn-out legal process is exactly what's wrong 
with our legal system today. The question is whether the sedative Midazolam is 
powerful enough to put inmates into a deep state of unconsciousness before two 
other drugs will paralyze them and subsequently stop their hearts. These 
inmates have been charged with the heinous, unconscionable charges like rape 
and murder.

Why is there even any question of whether or not they will feel any pain during 
this process? What about the victims and the excruciating pain they must have 
endured before death finally claimed them? What about their rights? I couldn't 
care less how much pain or suffering the inmates endure. The state says it has 
the capability of performing these executions now and "should" be permitted to 
so.

Failing to enforce the death penalty is bad for this state and every other 
state that has failed to do so due to "legal ramifications."

ROBERT JOHNSON

Warren

(source: Letter to the Editor, Tribune-Chronicle)






UTAH:

State sanctioned murder


Capital punishment, as anything other than a self-defense measure, is beyond 
the pale of humanity and into that of barbarism, the most egregious aspect 
being the abdication of our most fundamental human right. It is a supreme 
presumption on the part of the state to assume power over the life and death of 
its citizens. By what dispensation?

Laws reflect the character of society, and the death penalty is nothing more 
than state-sanctioned murder. Its use as a deterrence for crime is of 
questionable efficacy and dubious probity. It is a sad comment on our society 
to seek vengeance under the guise of deterrence. As with other practices of 
dubious morality down through the ages, human society often chooses to hide 
behind God. But it is a human act carried out on behalf of the people.

Human judgment is fraught with error, and there is no reprieve from death. 
Incarceration obviates any concerns for safety, allows for recourse and serves 
the demands of justice. One possible justification for the death penalty would 
be for use as a legal gambit in plea bargaining, but this, too, is morally 
indefensible. Think twice before empowering the state to take life.

The only legitimate justification for capital punishment is self-defense - and 
that has been rendered unnecessary.

Kent Jackson Fetzer

Salt Lake City

(source: Letter to the Editor, Salt Lake Tribune)






NEVADA:

Lawmakers introduce bill to end death penalty


Assemblyman James Ohrenschall and Sen. Tick Segerblom, both Las Vegas 
Democrats, on Friday introduced Assembly Bill 237, which would abolish capital 
punishment in Nevada.

If enacted, the bill will set life without the possibility of parole as the 
maximum punishment for crime. In doing so, any current sentences to death would 
be commuted to life without parole.

When asked to provide some background for the bill, co-sponsor Segerblom said 
it was submitted not only from a moral standpoint, but as a matter of 
practicality.

"It's costing the state millions of dollars to try to kill people, when in fact 
the system does not allow you to kill people," he said. "The fact is that given 
the way the process works, the number of appeals, no one is going to be 
executed in Nevada in our lifetime.

"Meanwhile, to try to execute somebody, the cost for prosecution doubles, you 
have to hire twice as many lawyers, a psychiatrist, and the legal fees just go 
from there."

According to 2016 statistics provided by the Death Penalty Information Center, 
Nevada had 80 inmates on death row in Ely but the last execution was in April 
of 2006. This high number can be attributed to 2 principle factors. The 1st is 
a lack of availability of lethal injection drugs. After the 2015 session 
allocated $860,000 for a new, ADA-compliant execution chamber, the state could 
not find a pharmaceutical company to supply the necessary drugs out of the 247 
that were asked for proposals.

Many pharmaceutical companies have steered away from production of lethal 
injection drugs because of a series of lawsuits within the last 15 years, 
questioning not only the legality of the death penalty, but protocols for 
lethal injection and ethics of supplying the drug.

The 2nd reason is the unlimited appeals allowed upon being sentenced to death. 
Because Nevada Revised Statute does not enumerate a limit on appeals of an 
execution sentencing, the 12 individuals executed since 1979 have all been 
voluntarily executed. All other inmates have spent the remainder of their lives 
on death row submitting appeals.

With the strong Democratic majority in the Legislature, leadership is confident 
they will see the bill through to the desk of Gov. Brian Sandoval.

The Republican caucus declined to comment on the bill at this time. The bill 
was assigned to the Assembly Committee on Judiciary, where it will be heard 
within the coming weeks.

(source: Elko Free Press)