[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., N.C., OHIO, IND., KY., NEB., CALIF.

[Rick Halperin]

June 13



TEXAS:

Gustavo Tijerina-Sandoval formally sentenced to death for murder of Border 
Patrol agent



Gustavo Tijerina-Sandoval appeared in court Tuesday for his formal sentencing, 
almost a week after a Cameron County jury sentenced him to death for the murder 
of Border Patrol Agent Javier Vega Jr.

The courtroom was filled with dozens of Border Patrol agents and other law 
enforcement, who were there in support of the Vega family.

Judge Migdalia Lopez presented the verdict, sentencing Tijerina-Sandoval to 
death for the capital murder charge and life for attempted capital murder.

At that hearing, Marie Vega, the mother of the Border Patrol agent Javier Vega 
Jr., read a final statement addressed to Tijerina-Sandoval.

"I hope you spend the rest of your time on death row thinking about the day you 
are finally put to death, " said Marie Vega. She went on to say, "You sentenced 
yourself to the death penalty. Tijerina, you broke the law. You killed an 
innocent man. You thought you were so brave and tough, now be brave and tough 
and suck it up and die like you need to."

Tijerina-Sandoval was not present during her statement. As Judge Lopez 
dismissed the court, all Border Patrol agents got in line and exchanged hugs 
with the Vega family.

"Justice has been served in the Javier Vega murder," said Manuel Padilla Jr, 
Chief Patrol Agent. "Although this doesn't bring our agent back, it just shows 
the justice system does work."

Although this trial is over, the Willacy County District Attorney's Office is 
now preparing for the trial of Ismael Hernandez-Vallejo, a co-defendant in this 
case.

Hernandez-Vallegjo's trial is expected to start in August. Prosecutors will 
also seek the death penalty in that case.

(source: valleycentral.com)

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

Man Sentenced to Death For Killing Agent Tells Court "Thank You for Making Me 
Famous"



"Thank you for making me famous it was my dream to be on TV," are the words a 
man sentenced to death for capital murder said at his sentencing.

Last month, the jury found Sandoval guilty of killing off-duty border patrol 
agent Javier Vega Jr. and last week the jury's verdict for capital murder was 
the death penalty.

Vega Jr.'s mother, Marie Vega, stood in front of the courtroom and tearfully 
spoke on behalf of the family, saying the sentence was just.

While Vega's Jr's father and wife sat with the dozens of border patrol agents 
who attended the sentencing, with tears in their eyes.

"You need to die for what you did, you don't deserve to live or breathe our 
air," Marie Vega said.

After the sentencing, Defense Attorney Nat Perez told News Center 23 said that 
this was the longest trial he has even been involved in.

"It was pretty tedious and contested I think it was hard fought, and certainly 
we're a little disappointed with the verdict," Perez said.

"We'll be filing a direct appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals, we think 
there's some things that the Court of Appeals should look at, and then we'll 
see what they say," he said.

During the course of the trial, jury heard Vega Jr.'s parents and children 
testify about the day the murder took place, when Sandoval and other suspect, 
Ismael Hernandez, Vallejo ambushed the Vega's while they were fishing on August 
3, 2014.

They also watched Sandoval's video interview with Texas Rangers, where he weeps 
and says he must pay the price.

The defense has 30 days from today to file a motion for a new trial, although 
it is likely it will be denied.

(source: KVEO news)

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

5 controversial moments in the case that sent Darlie Routier to death row for 
her son's murder



Darlie Routier was convicted and sentenced to die for fatally stabbing her 
5-year-old son Damon in June 1996. More than 2 decades later, the Rowlett woman 
remains in prison - 1 of only 6 women on Texas' death row.

Devon, 6, was also slain, but Routier was convicted of only 1 murder because 
prosecutors decided to ensure the option to pursue a 2nd indictment if the 1st 
trial didn't net a lasting conviction.

Routier has maintained an intruder broke in while she slept and killed her sons 
before she chased him away. She said she could not remember much of what 
happened that night, and a psychiatrist for the defense said she was a victim 
of "traumatic amnesia."

But prosecutors called that a convenient excuse and argued Routier killed her 
children because they interfered with the life she wanted to live.

On Tuesday at 9 p.m., ABC aired the 1st episode of The Last Defense, a 7-part 
documentary series that focuses on the death row cases of Routier and Oklahoma 
man Julius Jones.

Viola Davis and Julius Tennon are the executive producers of the series, which 
the network says "explores and exposes flaws in the American justice system."

Following is a look at 5 moments that helped define the Routier investigation, 
trial and the aftermath of her conviction:

During Routier's death-penalty trial, jurors heard a 6-minute 911 call from the 
night of the attack. Prosecutors said the call supported what officers said 
about Routier's behavior, but the defense said the recording showed she was 
traumatized and distracted by the chaos in her home. They argued Routier should 
not be held accountable for what she said or did during that time.

In the recording, Routier tells the dispatcher that she touched the knife, the 
suspected murder weapon, and added, "I wonder if we could have gotten the 
prints maybe."

She mentions her husband ran downstairs but doesn't ask about their infant son, 
Drake.

Officers testified that Routier was upset and screaming, but didn't appear to 
be in shock and seemed very alert. One officer said he told Routier to apply 
pressure to the stab wounds on Damon's back as he gasped for breath, but 
instead, she did nothing.

"I thought if she was worried about fingerprints on a knife, she could 
certainly take care of her kids," Officer David Waddell said during the trial.

He added that she did not follow paramedics when they carried Damon to an 
ambulance and did not ask where they were taking him.

Bloody evidence and the garage escape

Over and over, Routier, who was 26 at the time of her sons' murders, said a man 
wearing dark clothes and a baseball cap attacked the boys, then her, before 
escaping through the garage.

But investigators said evidence at the scene was inconsistent with Routier's 
account.

Investigators found no blood in the garage or on the garage window or wooden 
fence surrounding the backyard. The window sills in the garage had layers of 
dust, and the mulch in the flower beds between the garage and the backyard gate 
was undisturbed, an arrest warrant stated.

Lab tests did find fingerprints on the garage window that did not belong to 
Routier, her husband or law enforcement, but it's unclear who left them.

Routier said she found the knife on the floor in the utility room, but 
investigators didn't find any blood splatter or other marks that would have 
indicated the knife was dropped there.

Blood was found near the kitchen sink, but no appreciable amount on the couch 
where Routier said she had been stabbed. There had been attempts to clean the 
countertop and sink before police arrived, and police suggested that she may 
have inflicted the wounds herself, the affidavit stated.

Police said a bloody sock was found on the grass several houses down. Routier's 
relatives cited it as evidence that someone else killed the boys, and the 
defense said there was no way Routier would have had time to stage the crime 
scene.

Much debate also centered around a bloody fingerprint on the coffee table near 
her son's body. Part of her appeal centered on the print belonging to an adult, 
not one of Routier's slain children.

The print was never compared to the children's fingers because morgue workers 
did not take the children's prints, which is usually standard procedure.

In 2008, a federal judge granted additional testing of the sock, a butcher 
knife, the fibers from another knife and gave permission to run four 
fingerprints through a national database. The DNA was submitted last year for 
testing, but there have been no other recent updates.

The Silly String video

Days after the boys' deaths, the Routiers held a graveside birthday party for 
Devon on what would have been his 7th birthday.

They sprayed Silly String on the grave and sang "Happy Birthday." KXAS-TV 
(NBC5) recorded the celebration and interviewed the couple who said they had 
nothing to hide.

Routier was arrested four days later and charged with capital murder.

The NBC5 footage of the Silly String and a smiling Routier was shown during the 
trial. Prosecutors said her behavior at her children's graves showed a lack of 
grief and remorse.

Defense attorneys said the tape showed a family trying to cope with grief.

It was not the only time jurors heard statements about Routier's lack of 
remorse.

An emergency room doctor testified that the mother seemed emotionless when he 
tended to the knife wounds to her neck, shoulder and forearm. Dr. Alex Santos 
called the wounds "superficial," but agreed that they came millimeters from 
cutting her carotid artery.

A nurse's note, however, described Routier as "very emotional, crying, sobbing 
and talking about events in her family."

The gravesite recording

During Routier's trial, a detective testified that investigators hid 
microphones near the boys' graves in Rockwall before Devon's birthday in the 
hopes that someone might make a confession that would lead police to the 
killer.

In 1997, after an FBI investigation, U.S. Attorney Paul E. Coggins announced 
that the Rowlett Police Department would not face federal charges for planting 
the hidden microphones.

Attorneys and others questioned the legality of the move.

The investigation determined that the decision was based on legal advice 
indicating the technique was lawful.

In June 1998, Routier's mother and husband filed a lawsuit accusing the police 
detectives and a prosecutor of invading their privacy. The suit was later 
dismissed.

The trial transcript

Court transcript problems became central to Routier's appeal, which was delayed 
because of the issues.

Following the trial, one of Routier's attorneys found errors in the transcript, 
which was needed for an appeal. Court reporter Sandra Halsey refused to answer 
questions, and a state district judge ordered a review.

In 1999, a complaint filed with the state board alleged that Halsey's work was 
"incompetent, inaccurate, unprofessional and untimely" and that she lied to 
hide mistakes.

She was ordered to pay $32,265 for the cost of getting the transcript fixed and 
had her license revoked.

A 2nd court reporter who was appointed to reconstruct portions of the 
transcript using Halsey's audio recordings, stenographer's notes and the 
original transcript, said the 1st version contained 18,000 errors.

She also had to make a new version of 53 pages of the transcript detailing 
pretrial issues and preliminary jury selection using stenographic notes rather 
than audio recordings after Halsey reportedly could not find the tape.

Finally, in November 1999 a judge approved the revised transcript. Routier's 
team filed an appeal in 2001, but in 2003 the Court of Criminal Appeals 
rejected Routier's claims and upheld her conviction.

(source: Dallas Morning News)

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

Fifth Circuit Chastises 2 Texas Attorneys For Filing Last-Minute Death Penalty 
Stay



The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has chastised 2 Texas attorneys 
in connection with a last-minute effort to stay the execution of a death row 
client, though it stopped short of sanctioning them.

Seth Kretzer and Carlo D'Angelo represented Rosendo Rodriguez III, who was 
convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in 2009 for the murder of 
Summer Baldwin, a pregnant prostitute he killed and stuffed in a suitcase.

After years of unsuccessful appeals, the attorneys filed another writ of habeas 
corpus a week ahead of Rodriguez's March 27 execution date, alleging they found 
newly discovered evidence that questioned the credibility of Lubbock County 
Medical Examiner Dr. Sridhar Natarajan, who performed the autopsy on Baldwin's 
body.

The writ alleged that the lawyers had become aware on Feb. 16 of a 2015 
wrongful termination suit filed against Natarajan by Dr. Luisa Florez, who 
claimed that Natarajan was not performing his own autopsies but was delegating 
those duties to technicians who were not trained doctors. The writ also alleged 
that Natarajan and Lubbock County settled that lawsuit, and paid Florez 
$230,000, on Nov. 7, 2017.

The Fifth Circuit denied the writ, and Rodriguez was executed as scheduled 
March 27. 2 days day later, according to the decision, the Fifth Circuit issued 
a show cause order against Kretzer and D'Angelo, directing them to explain why 
they shouldn't be sanctioned for filing the successive writ.

The Fifth Circuit asked the attorneys to explain 2 things: When did they first 
became aware of the 2015 lawsuit that Dr. Florez settled in 2017, and why their 
writ did not mention the Feb. 26 eyewitness affidavit, filed by prosecutors in 
Rodriguez's criminal matter, of former Lubbock County homicide investigator 
Garland Timms, who swore he personally witnessed the autopsy of Baldwin 
performed by Natarajan.

In their response, according to the court, the attorneys explained they knew 
nothing about the Florez suit until February 2018, because the case was only 
disclosed in a handful of Lubbock media outlets.

As for Timms' affidavit, which was created 12 years after the autopsy occurred, 
they noted they had no opportunity to cross-examine Timms about his statement.

Those answers did not completely satisfy the Fifth Circuit panel, but the court 
ultimately decided against sanctioning the attorneys.

"As to the 1st question, counsel claimed their client, now executed, informed 
them about the lawsuit filed by Dr. Florez in February 2018, which precipitated 
their filings," the Fifth Circuit panel wrote in per curiam opinion. "Counsel 
nevertheless failed directly to answer the second question, and instead 
asserted unpersuasive, post-hoc arguments as to why this court should have 
discredited the affidavit."

"After reviewing counsels' submissions carefully, we do not impose sanctions, 
but we chastise habeas counsel for failing to even acknowledge, much less 
attempt, to rebut an affidavit timely offered by the state that on its face 
contradicted the factual basis for the last minute successive petition," the 
court wrote.

"This court takes very seriously its duty to review all petitions on behalf of 
petitioners facing execution. Our task is made all the more difficult when 
counsel, having already pressed against an impending execution date, simply 
ignore the facts brought to bear by the state that undermine their newly 
discovered theories," the court wrote. "There is no excuse for such delays."

"This bespeaks lack of candor to the court and arguably lack of a good-faith 
basis for the positions they espoused," the court concluded. "However, 
attorneys Seth Kretzer and Carlo D'Angelo are admonished that their pleadings 
and filings in future cases will be scrutinized for accuracy, completeness and 
compliance with Rule 11," which allows courts to sanction attorney for filing 
pleadings that have no evidentiary support.

The panel that admonished the attorneys consisted of Fifth Circuit Judges Edith 
Jones and Jerry Smith. Judge James Dennis also sat on the panel but declined to 
participate in the lawyers' admonishment.

Kretzer, a Houston attorney who frequently litigates criminal appeals before 
the Fifth Circuit, said he was happy to answer the Fifth Circuit's questions 
and welcomes their scrutiny.

"Obviously, we have nothing but the greatest respect and deference for all of 
the judges on the Fifth Circuit," Kretzer said.

"I welcome any scrutinization of my work for completeness and accuracy," added 
Kretzer, noting that he and his co-counsel hired Thomas C. Wright, a Houston 
attorney who defends attorneys in professional responsibility cases, to answer 
the Fifth Circuit show cause order.

"I hired an outside counsel to check our work. If I felt I had done anything 
wrong, I would have said so," Kretzer said.

D'Angelo, a Tyler attorney, and Wright, both did not return calls for comment.

(saource: Texas Lawyer)








PENNSYLVANIA:

Death penalty trial underway for man accused of using vodka to set fire that 
killed wife



Testimony is underway in the death penalty trial of a man accused of killing 
his wife in 2014.

James Karr is accused of knocking his wife Maureen Karr unconscious during an 
argument at their Friendship Street home in Duquesne, tying her up and setting 
the house on fire.

Investigators said Maureen Karr took out a protection of abuse order two weeks 
before the fire, claiming her estranged husband was "threatening to set the 
house on fire."

The case will not be decided by a jury, but instead will be decided by Judge 
Anthony Mariani.

The district attorney's office said this is the 1st time during the 
administration of District Attorney Stephen Zapalla that a capital case has 
been decided by a judge instead of a jury.

(source: WPXI news)








NORTH CAROLINA:

Meet the 'Death Row Granny', one of America's most prolific female serial 
killers



When we picture a person responsible for some heinous crime - be it real or 
fictional - we probably imagine someone ice-cold and sinister: a loner, an 
aggressor, somebody who exudes a palpable sort of evil from every aspect of 
their demeanor. Think Christian Bale in American Psycho, for instance, or Ian 
Brady and Myra Hindley (the Moors Murderers).

It just seems incomprehensible that someone who looks so "normal" - who looks 
nice, even - could possibly be a threat to their fellow friends and neighbours.

So, when Velma Barfield (nee Margie Velma Bullard), a seemingly sweet woman in 
her 50s, confessed to multiple murders, the world was stunned.

Barfield was born in a rural part of South Carolina in 1932, but spent most of 
her childhood in the neighbouring North Carolina. By all accounts, her youth 
was not a particularly happy time, and her father was reportedly very abusive. 
In order to escape that lifestyle, she married young - being just 17 at the 
time - and went to live with her husband, Thomas Burke.

Their marriage was a happy one at first. They had 2 children together, and 
appeared to be living a fairly contented lifestyle. However, later on in their 
relationship, Barfield had a hysterectomy, and subsequently developed an 
addiction to painkillers after the procedure left her with chronic back issues. 
This apparently caused a change in her personality which, in turn, caused her 
husband to turn to drinking.

After that, the couple would have vicious arguments, and the tension between 
them only ended when their relationship did. And how did that happen? Well, one 
night in 1969, when Burke was passed out drunk on the couch, Barfield took 
their children out. By the time they returned, their home was burnt to the 
ground.

>From that point onward, Barfield's life was littered with a suspicious amount 
of death.

In 1970 - mere months after the woman's 1st husband had perished in a fire - 
Barfield remarried, this time to a widower named Jennings Barfield. Once again, 
however, their relationship quickly deteriorated after he confronted her about 
her misuse of prescription drugs.

Less than a year after they were married, the widower died after contracting a 
mysterious illness and suffering a heart attack.

>From the outside, it appeared as if Velma Barfield simply had bad luck when it 
came to choosing husbands - but she knew otherwise. Even so, other people 
didn't begin to suspect there had been any foul play until years later, by 
which point the woman had offed at least 6 people.

Her next victim - shockingly - was her own mother.

In 1974, Lillian Bullard (Barfield's mother) developed an aggressive illness, 
the symptoms of which were nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. She actually managed 
to recover from it once, but it struck again around Christmas time of the same 
year - and that time, she wasn't as lucky.

After that, in 1977, 3 more people died after coming into contact with 
Barfield. Montgomery and Dollie Edwards, an elderly couple that Barfield worked 
for, passed away within weeks of one another, with Dollie suffering from 
exactly the same symptoms as her caretaker's 2nd husband.

With both her clients dead, Barfield had to take another caretaking job; this 
time for 76-year-old Record Lee, who had recently broken her leg. Lee actually 
survived Barfield's murder spree but her husband, John Henry, succumbed to a 
severe gastrointestinal illness that caused - you guessed it - severe nausea, 
diarrhea, and vomiting.

In 1978, Barfield ended the life of her final victim. His name was Rowland 
Stuart Taylor and he was a relative of one of Barfield's previous targets, 
Dollie Edwards. The twice-widowed woman was in a relationship with Taylor, but 
was also using him by forging checks in his name. After fearing he might have 
found out about her illegal activity on her account, Barfield sorted the matter 
in the only way she knew how to by this point: murder.

Taylor died the day after attending a church service with Barfield and, once 
again, everyone thought she was simply unlucky. This time around, however, a 
woman claiming to be Barfield's sister called police and informed them that she 
believed the widow had poisoned her boyfriend. In fact, she said, Barfield had 
killed several others before using the same method.

Sure enough, after investigation, autopsy results found arsenic in Taylor's 
system, and tests performed on the bodies of John Henry, Lillian Bullard, 
Dollie Edwards, and Jennings Barfield all showed traces of the poison, too. 
Barfield would eventually confess to four of these murders, plus the murder of 
Montgomery Edwards, but always denied killing her 2nd husband.

She was never tied to her 1st husband's death, either, but it's always been 
suspected that she might have had a hand in it.

In the end, Barfield was only convicted of the 1st-degree murder of Stuart 
Taylor - but that was enough to get her the death penalty. She spent 6 years on 
death row, during which time she became a born-again Christian and earned 
herself the nickname, the "Death Row Granny".

She was the 1st woman ever to be put to death by lethal injection in the USA - 
much to the disagreement of anti-death penalty campaigners and fellow 
Christians who had asked for Barfield's sentence to be commuted to life 
imprisonment.

Before she died, Barfield said: "I'm sorry for any hurt I've caused anybody. 
There isn't a day goes by that I don't think about this and wish that it were 
possible for me myself to take that hurt."

To this day, she remains one of the most prolific female serial killers of all 
time.

(sourcwe: vt.co)








OHIO:

Even bad guys are guaranteed due process



We are a government of laws and not a government of men. If we were a 
government of men, we surely would all seek the death penalty for many wrongs 
done to us and nearly all wrongs done to those we love. Undoubtedly, there are 
offenses for which we all become inspired to vigilantism.

Enshrined in the U.S. Constitution is the right for all persons to be zealously 
represented by a lawyer when facing criminal charges brought by the government. 
Brian Golsby is no different. He was facing the most serious charges possible. 
He was entitled to and received a zealous defense to the charges and the 
government's attempts to sentence him to death.

While letter writer Emily Prieto apparently disagrees ("Defense attorney helped 
bad guy live," last Tuesday), 12 jurors believed that the appropriate 
punishment after a full trial where they heard all the evidence presented by 
both sides was life imprisonment with no chance of parole.

Far from being a disgrace, Diane Menashe, like all criminal defense lawyers, 
protects the constitutional rights of all citizens by defending the rights of 
those charged with crimes.

Kenneth R. Bailey, president, The Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

Columbus

(source: Letter to the Editor, Columbus Dispatch)








INDIANA:

Private attorneys in death penalty cases create dilemmas for judges, public 
defenders



After spending much of the pretrial conference questioning the defense attorney 
about her caseload, ability to retain co-counsel and the expenses related to 
hiring an investigator and mitigation specialist, Marion Superior Judge Sheila 
Carlisle concluded by describing the situation taking place in her courtroom.

"This is uncharted territory," she said.

The stakes are high because the defendant, Jason Brown, is facing the death 
penalty for allegedly killing a police officer. But the twist comes from the 
accused, who is indigent, being represented by a private attorney who is doing 
the work pro bono. Carlisle was juggling the man's right to choose his own 
counsel with the court's concern not only over how much the county would have 
to pay for his defense, but also whether his lawyer would be able to handle the 
case from start to finish.

At risk is having to redo - and pay nearly $1 million for - the whole trial 
again if Brown is convicted and sentenced to death. The appeal would likely 
argue ineffective counsel and, should the Indiana Supreme Court agree, the 
guilty verdict could get overturned with the case getting sent back for 
retrial.

For now, State of Indiana v. Jason Dane Brown, 49G03-1708-MR-028177, is 
proceeding with the defendant's counsel of choice, Denise Turner. She spent 6 
years in the Marion County Public Defender Agency before leaving to start her 
own practice. While she has received training on representing clients facing 
the death penalty, she has never worked a capital murder case.

Turner said this case came to her through an email that was forwarded from an 
investigator Brown's family had contacted after his arrest. As she explained, 
the family did not want a public defender and was talking to another attorney. 
But the other lawyer, Turner said, was a former prosecutor with little 
experience handling major felony trials and who had not been doing criminal 
defense work for very long.

"So I was terrified that Jason's case would go to someone inexperienced and 
only in it for the possible publicity," Turner said. "So for the family, it 
wasn't a question of me representing Jason or the case going to the public 
defender agency; it was the other attorney or me."

An appeal withdrawn

Defense attorneys say private counsel representing a death penalty defendant is 
rare in Indiana. Public defenders typically defend individuals charged with 
capital crimes because of the cost of the case coupled with the demands of 
preparing for trial.

Until the beginning of 2018, the state had 2 death penalty cases represented by 
private counsel who needed to draw upon public funds to support their defenses. 
In addition to Turner, Fort Wayne attorney Nikos Nakos of Nakos & Adams was 
defending Marcus Dansby, who is accused of stabbing and shooting to death 3 
adults and an unborn child.

Larry Landis, executive director of the Indiana Public Defender Council, said 
he empathizes with the dilemma judges confront in these cases. The bench has to 
weigh the defendant's right to choose counsel against the ability of the 
attorney to provide representation.

The Fort Wayne case, State of Indiana V. Marcus D. Dansby, 
02D06-1609-MR-000010, could have provided some guidance for resolving that 
dilemma. Allen Superior Judge Frances Gull removed Nakos at the beginning of 
the year and appointed 2 public defenders, Michelle Kraus and Robert Gevers II.

Kraus said Gull carefully laid out her reasons for replacing Nakos. The judge 
made a record, citing caselaw and the standards from the American Bar 
Association, as she detailed what private counsel had done and not done on the 
Dansby case.

Nakos disputed that he was not adequately representing his client. He claimed 
he had hired a mitigation expert but Gull, after she signed the order allowing 
the expense, wanted more documentation showing the expert was qualified. That 
individual got angry and quit.

When Nakos found another, he said Gull referred to his submission to the court 
as containing "stupid (stuff)." In January 2018, he filed a motion for the 
judge to recuse herself and soon after, Gull removed him from the case.

Once the public defenders were appointed, they filed a petition for an 
interlocutory appeal. Kraus explained the central question under the Sixth 
Amendment was whether the defendant's right to an attorney of his own choice 
trumps his right to effective counsel. Although the trial court granted the 
petition, the public defenders decided not to proceed to the Indiana Supreme 
Court and withdrew the appeal.

Kraus said an appeal would have likely stayed the case for several months and 
the defendant wanted to keep things moving forward. The defense, she said, 
believes they have preserved the issue and, if needed after the trial, can 
revive the issue.

Although private counsel in death penalty cases is rare, Landis would still 
like to see the Indiana Supreme Court address the Sixth Amendment issue.

"At some point that dilemma needs to get resolved and it may ultimately get 
resolved in the Fort Wayne case if there is a trial and conviction," he said. 
"If the verdict is appealed, that will be one of the appellate issues."

Still a gray area

Fran Watson, professor in the criminal defense and wrongful conviction clinics 
at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, pointed to a recent 
ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court which could influence any subsequent decision 
by the Indiana justices.

The 6-3 decision in McCoy v. Louisiana held that a defendant has the right to 
choose the objective of the defense even if the attorney believes another 
strategy would avoid the death penalty. Watson sees this ruling as analogous to 
the Brown and Dansby cases. Following the Supreme Court???s reasoning, Brown 
and Dansby's right to pick their attorney would outweigh their right to 
effective counsel.

Indiana Prosecuting Attorney Council executive director David Powell and Jim 
Oliver, IPAC deputy director for criminal law, speculated that even with a 
ruling from the Indiana Supreme Court, questions still would arise. The 2 
offered insight into death penalty cases but emphasized they were only talking 
in general terms and not specifically about the Brown or Dansby cases.

They agreed guidance about defendants' rights in capital cases would be 
helpful, but attorneys and judges could still struggle even if the justices 
create a bright line. Every case has a different set of facts so, they said, 
gray areas will probably still exist.

No blank check

In the Brown pre-trial conference, Turner sat alone with her client at the 
defense table, surrounded by 5 sheriff's deputies. At the other table, 3 
prosecuting attorneys crowded together.

Carlisle pressed Turner. Among the judge's concerns was that the defense 
attorney has not found co-counsel, currently was defending 49 felony cases, and 
did not seem to be adequately preparing. Turner said she is actively seeking 
another attorney to assist and that she is doing all things that need to be 
done. In addition, she told Carlisle that the bulk of her workload was 
manageable because most of her cases were Level 6 felonies and Brown was her 
only murder case.

The judge was also concerned about the cost. Carlisle reminded the attorney she 
would have to justify the expenses because there would be no blank check.

A county can get reimbursed for half the cost of the capital defense but, 
according to Landis, only if the attorneys meet the requirements outlined in 
Rule 24 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure. Turner does not meet the 
requirements in part because she has no experience with a capital case and 
because she currently is defending more than 20 open felony cases. So, Marion 
County might have to foot her entire bill.

An analysis done by the Legislative Services Agency in 2015 examined the cost 
of the 8 death penalty cases that went to trial in Indiana between 1995 and 
2013. The average cost of a capital murder trial was $789,581 with the state 
expenditures totaling $420,234 and the county expenditures reaching $369,347.

Turner acknowledged she is frustrated with the battles she feels she is having 
to fight to defend Brown. She said she understands that nobody wants the case 
to be reversed and sent back, but she worries that her client is not the center 
of everyone's attention.

Nevertheless, knowing what she knows now, Turner said she would still take 
Brown's case.

"If I felt like I was contributing to the community or to one person, I still 
would do it," she said. "I believe that nothing great comes with ease."

(source: The Indiana Lawyer)



KENTUCKY:

Death penalty to remain option in Butler double murder case



A judge denied bail Monday for a man suspected in the deaths of a retired 
pastor and his wife.

The death penalty will also remain a potential option for punishment for Kevin 
Dye if he is found guilty as charged of 2 counts of murder.

Dye, 36, of Morgantown, is accused of shooting and killing Kenneth Neafus, 71, 
and his wife, Dorothy, 70, who were found dead Aug. 9, 2016, at their Richland 
Church Road home.

Dye is also accused of receiving stolen property (firearm) and possession of a 
firearm by a convicted felon.

He has been held in Butler County Jail since his arrest Aug. 25, 2016, but his 
defense team of attorneys Currie and Wes Milliken filed motions to eliminate 
the death penalty and to set a bond for his release while the case is pending.

Dye's attorneys argued the evidence in the case is too weak to support a 
finding of guilt on all charges and a jury's decision in favor of the death 
penalty would be "arbitrary, capricious and inadequately reliable."

Court filings by Dye's attorney featured claims that Dye's DNA hasn't been 
found at the crime scene and the Neafuses' DNA hasn't been found in Dye's 
vehicle.

"The stuff most likely to have yielded that (evidence) has all been tested and 
ruled out," Wes Milliken said Monday.

Butler County Commonwealth's Attorney Blake Chambers disputed the defense's 
characterization of the evidence, saying Monday that 102 items have been 
gathered by Kentucky State Police and sent for testing at the KSP Central Lab.

Most of those items have been analyzed, but 22 items are left to be tested, 
Chambers said.

State law allows prosecutors to seek the death penalty in murder cases under 
any of several conditions, including if the case involves multiple deaths.

Chambers also contended that, because the offenses in the case are punishable 
by death, bail cannot be imposed on the defendant.

To support his argument, he called KSP Detective Jason Lanham as a witness to 
testify about his involvement in the investigation.

Lanham said he was called to the Neafuses' home to assist in the investigation 
Aug. 9, 2016, and found Kenneth Neafus' body in the yard near the front of the 
house and his wife's body on a couch in the living room.

Both people appeared to have been shot in the head, and Kenneth Neafus' body 
showed signs of blunt force trauma to the head as well, Lanham said.

Prescription bottles and firearms were reported missing from the residence.

The detective began talking to relatives of the late couple.

"The family could not give me the name of anyone they'd suspect of doing this," 
Lanham said.

About a week later, Lanham heard from one of the couple's daughters, who 
recalled visiting with her parents in July 2016 and noticed that her father was 
acting strangely and mentioned he had received some troubling information, but 
he did not elaborate.

Lanham was also contacted by KSP Sgt. Brian McKinney, a Morgantown resident who 
suggested looking into Dye as a possible suspect.

"(McKinney) described (Dye) to me as very hot-headed ... a local drug dealer, 
he heard he had been breaking into houses and going door-to-door asking for 
money," Lanham said.

KSP officers received an anonymous tip Aug. 11, 2016, urging them to 
investigate Dye and heard from then-Butler County Jailer Terry Fugate four days 
later, who reported that someone came to his house about the murder and said 
"Dye was a good suspect to look at" and that he had been trying to get money 
from elderly residents in the area, Lanham testified.

Lanham said he attempted to contact Dye at his residence but got no answer and 
left a business card.

Dye came to KSP Post 3 in Bowling Green on Aug. 16, 2016, and was interviewed 
by detectives about his actions around the time of the homicides.

Dye was reluctant to answer a question from Lanham about whether he knew of a 
reason to kill the Neafuses.

"I repeated the question 4 times, but he never answered the question," Lanham 
said. "He started crying ... and said they were good people and they really 
helped (him)."

On Aug. 24, 2016, KSP heard from someone who reported that one of Dye's 
children talked about seeing Dye with blood on his arms, and Lanham followed up 
the following day, meeting the child at Morgantown Elementary School.

The child told police that he was in Dye's vehicle on the night of Aug. 8, 
2016, outside of what police confirmed was the Neafus residence and that he saw 
"an older, bigger man" run out of the house toward the car, with Dye pushing 
the man away from the car and onto the grass, Lanham said.

The child described Dye as "hitting the bad man with a rock" and said Dye got 
into the car and used wet wipes to clean blood from his arms, the detective 
testified.

Multiple neighbors also reported that their homes were burglarized and money, 
weapons and drugs were stolen a few days after Dye visited them to ask for 
money, Lanham said.

Police obtained a search warrant for the car and Dye's residence, where they 
found a .32-caliber revolver that had been reported stolen. The Neafuses were 
struck with bullets fired from a .32-caliber firearm, Lanham said.

Dye was interviewed again the day of his arrest, and he was confrontational 
with police.

"He was so confrontational we had to stand up and detain him," Lanham said.

KSP obtained Dye's cellphone and saw no activity during a 2-week period around 
the double homicide, but interviews with relatives established that Dye had 
been calling and sending texts during that time, Lanham said.

A pair of boots were also taken from Dye's home and found to have blood on them 
from three individuals, but there was not enough blood to do a comparative 
analysis and determine whose blood it was, according to the detective.

Under cross-examination from Wes Milliken, Lanham said testing of the firearm 
could not confirm that this was the murder weapon, and that none of the 
victims' blood was found in Dye's vehicle and no blood found in the Neafus' 
home matched Dye.

Lanham also testified he was not aware that Dye's son visited Chambers' office 
with his mother and recanted his account.

Crocker denied the motion for bail based on the information gathered in the 
investigation.

(source: Bowling Green Daily News)








NEBRASKA:

Garcia death penalty hearing to begin Wednesday



The death penalty phase for convicted serial killer Anthony Garcia is set to 
begin Wednesday.

Garcia was convicted in the 2008 deaths of Thomas Hunter, the 11-year-old son 
of Creighton University Medical Center pathologist Dr. William Hunter and the 
family's housekeeper, Shirlee Sherman, as well as the 2013 deaths of Creighton 
pathologist Dr. Roger Brumback and his wife Mary.

The 3 judge panel is expected to convene at 9 a.m. Wednesday. District Court 
Judge Gary Randall of Douglas County, District Court Judge W. Russell Bowie of 
Douglas County and District Judge Rick Schreiner of Gage County will determine 
whether Garcia will get life in prison or the death penalty.

Garcia's defense will argue mitigating circumstances. Prosecutors will argue 
aggravating circumstances.

If the 3 judge panel determines aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating 
circumstances, Garcia will get the death penalty.

(source: WOWT news)








CALIFORNIA:

ACLU revises tactics to stop executions in California



The will of the people is being challenged as the courts continue to stall the 
implementation of the death penalty. Despite the passage of Prop 66 to speed up 
executions, California has not conducted an execution since 2006. There are 
more than 750 people on death row. Of those, more than 20 have lost their final 
appeal.

Michele Hanisee President of the Association of Los Angeles District Attorneys 
says the American Civil Liberties Union, a longtime opponent of the death 
penalty, had to file a new lawsuit to continue their campaign to prevent any 
executions from taking place.

"After years of litigation and writing ballot initiatives, all their prior 
lawsuits and arguments had been defeated and Proposition 66, which the voters 
enacted, said the execution protocol is not subject to this public vetting 
process and the Administrative Procedures Act. You have to understand the 
execution protocol has always been a 50-60-page-long document. It's a soup to 
nuts recipe for what we're going to do if we're going to execute someone, 
including, are they sane enough? Do we move them to a secure cell? What is 
their last meal going to be? Do we get them a minister? Everything 
step-by-step. Now the ACLU is saying, 'whoa, whoa, whoa! All that stuff? That's 
not exempt from the public commentary process. Only the specific part about how 
you kill them.'"

She says the other stuff was never an issue for the ACLU before.

(source: KABC News)

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

Jurors Weigh Death Penalty for Former Marine Guilty in Serial Killings



An 8-time serial killer was driven by anger and frustration combined with 
childhood trauma and brain damage, his attorney on Monday told jurors who will 
soon weigh whether the convicted killer should receive the death penalty.

As the penalty phase in the capital murder trial of Andrew Urdiales came to an 
end, the 53-year-old killer's attorney argued that Urdiales feels remorse for 
his actions and helped bring closure to the victim's families by confessing to 
killing women in Orange, Riverside and San Diego counties.

Urdiales has been convicted of killing 1 woman in Orange County while stationed 
as a U.S. Marine at Camp Pendleton; 4 women in Riverside and San Diego counties 
while stationed at Twentynine Palms; and 3 women in Chicago while working as a 
security guard after leaving the military.

Urdiales' attorney, Denise Gragg, during her closing arguments Monday noted 
that had her client not brought up the California murders soon after being 
arrested for the Chicago killings, law enforcement officials would not have 
tied the slayings together.

"He didn't say he was crazy, he didn't say he was hallucinating, he didn't say 
that God made him do it," Gragg said. "He was trying to figure out why he did 
it, he didn't want to do it and he felt bad about doing it. Bad enough to go to 
therapy for years, and bad enough that when he knew he was caught for the 
Chicago murders to say 'call California'... that is worth something. That is 
worth a lot."

The same Santa Ana jury last month found Urdiales guilty of the Orange County 
murder of Robbin Brandley in 1986 in a Saddleback College parking lot in 
Mission Viejo; and over the next 7 years the Riverside County killings of Julie 
McGhee, Tammie Erwin and Denise Maney; and the San Diego slaying of Mary Ann 
Wells. A Chicago jury previously convicted him of the killings of Laura Uylaki, 
Cassandra Corum and Lynn Huberand.

During the most recent phase of the trial, jurors also heard dramatic testimony 
from Jennifer Asbenson, who described in terrifying detail how she escaped from 
Urdiales after being kidnapped and sexually assaulted in a remote Riverside 
County desert.

Gragg contended that Urdiales was born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, a 
result of his mother's drinking during her pregnancy. His condition was 
worsened by a childhood marked by emotional, physical, sexual and psychological 
abuse, as well as teen years in which he was targeted for regular harassment, 
the defense attorney said.

Gragg told jurors that Urdiales was unable to connect with others, particularly 
women, and had "free-floating anger" that led him to "lash out."

"There are people who commit these crimes because they just enjoy it," Gragg 
said. "They enjoy hurting other people. That is not Mr. Urdiales."

Deputy District Attorney Matt Murphy during his closing arguments. dismissed 
what he referred to as the "sad, abused, loner narrative."

"Kind of tough to make friends when you keep killing people you could be 
friends with," Murphy told jurors.

Murphy described Urdiales as a a "misogynistic, sadistic monster" who killed 
for his own pleasure. The prosecutor questioned whether Urdiales actually 
suffered from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, arguing that he was capable of 
controlling his impulse and desires.

Murphy also noted that Urdiales during one police interview told police he had 
no remorse for killing Brandley, an aspiring broadcaster who was stabbed 41 
times.

"What weight do we put on that?" Murphy asked the jury. "How many layers of 
horror do we need before (death) is the appropriate penalty?"

Jurors began deliberations on Tuesday morning as to whether Urdiales should 
receive the death penalty or life without the possibility of parole.

(source: military.com)

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

Gov. Brown should do the right thing and grant clemency to death row inmate 
Kevin Cooper



Stymied by legal challenges, the state of California has not executed any of 
its more than 700 condemned prisoners since 2006. But if the machinery of death 
ever does rev back up, Kevin Cooper will be on the short list of people to 
receive lethal injections. He shouldn't be, and Gov. Jerry Brown needs to 
ensure that it doesn't happen.

Cooper was convicted of horrific crimes. Douglas and Peggy Ryen, their 
10-year-old daughter Jessica, and 11-year-old houseguest Christopher Hughes 
were hacked and slashed to death in June 1983. The Ryens' 8-year-old son Josh 
miraculously survived having his throat cut.

Even though Cooper has spent more than 30 years on death row for the murders, 
however, serious questions have lingered.

For instance, Josh Ryen initially told hospital workers that the family had 
been attacked by 3 or 4 white men. Cooper is black.

What's more, a woman said that on the day of the murders, her former boyfriend 
had been wearing a tan T-shirt similar to one found near the crime scene. She 
also said he showed up at her house wearing blood-spattered coveralls. (The 
coveralls were discarded by a sheriff's deputy, the blood untested.)

No matter what the DNA test finds, Brown should commute Cooper's sentence to 
life in prison without parole.

The forensic evidence linking Cooper to the killings was thin, and there are 
strong arguments that some of it was planted after his arrest. For instance, 
years after Cooper's arrest, a blood test was performed on the tan T-shirt and, 
according to analysts, the test detected his DNA. At first, that seemed to be 
the incontrovertible scientific evidence that had for so long eluded 
investigators - but an appellate judge noted that the blood on the T-shirt 
contained signs of a chemical used by the sheriff's office to preserve blood in 
a laboratory for later testing. According to the judge, that suggested the 
blood "had been planted on the T-shirt."

That shirt remains at the center of the current battle over Cooper's guilt. 
Trace DNA tests not available at the time of the crimes or Cooper's trial or 
his earlier appeals could, experts argue, determine whether Cooper or someone 
else had worn the shirt. But since Cooper has exhausted his appeals, 
prosecutors have refused to conduct the test.

There are 2 outrages here. First, there is no rational reason not to do the 
tests. A man's life hangs in the balance. If the state wants to execute 
someone, it must go to extreme lengths to make certain the inmate is actually 
guilty. It's true that Cooper has exhausted all his legal appeals, but that's 
no reason to refuse to take another step to determine whether the state has 
convicted the wrong man. It was just 6 weeks ago that Vicente Benavides 
Figueroa was freed after a quarter-century on death row when it was finally 
determined that the medical evidence against him was based on incomplete 
records. 7 months ago, Craig Coley was released from a life sentence when new 
DNA tests of evidence from his 1980 trial proved his innocence.

Second, there are serious accusations here about the planting of evidence and 
the destruction of other evidence, the failure of prosecutors to share 
exculpatory evidence with Cooper's lawyer, lies by investigators and other acts 
of official misconduct. These demonstrate yet again why the capital punishment 
process is too imperfect and manipulable to be relied upon. Even if the DNA 
test doesn't provide incontrovertible proof that Cooper is innocent, it is 
still the case that actions by police and prosecutors - such as throwing away 
the bloody coveralls - deprived Cooper of due process and a fair trial.

Cooper filed this clemency petition more than 2 years ago, yet Brown has not 
acted on it. No matter what the DNA test finds, Brown should commute Cooper's 
sentence to life in prison without parole. (Because Cooper has prior felony 
burglary convictions, four state Supreme Court justices would have to approve, 
too.)

The Times opposes the death penalty under any circumstances in part because of 
cases such as this, in which a person who may very well be innocent could get 
executed. There is no known mechanism to ensure against that.

The governor, who also opposes the death penalty, knows the capital punishment 
system is inherently flawed. And the Cooper case bares those flaws in 
excruciating detail. The system has failed from beginning to end, and it would 
be both an error of judgment and a failure of morality to keep Cooper on death 
row any longer.

Brown has over his recent 8-year stint in the governor's office made tough 
decisions on a range of issues. This one actually is easy. Brown should grant 
clemency and see that the DNA test is conducted.

(source: Editorial, Los Angeles Times)

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

Suspect in weekend homicide could face death penalty



22-year-old Celina Victoria Ramirez may have been murdered as she waited at 
night along a north Stockton boulevard because she was willing to testify as a 
witness in another crime, according to charges presented in court Tuesday 
against the young gang member accused of killing her.

In addition, the San Joaquin County District Attorney's Office believes that 
defendant Alexes Daniel "Mumbles" Corrales, 20, carried out the murder of 
Ramirez for the benefit of his gang. If convicted, he faces the possibility of 
death or life in state prison without the possibility of parole.

Corrales, who is being held in County Jail without bail, appeared before a 
judge Tuesday for his arraignment on numerous felonies, including suspicion of 
murder with 3 special circumstances: murder of a witness, discharging a firearm 
from a vehicle with the intent to kill and murder committed for a criminal 
street gang.

He did not enter a plea Tuesday. Instead, Superior Court Judge Ron Northup 
appointed the Public Defender's Office to represent Corrales and scheduled 
further arraignment for June 26.

About 11:05 p.m. Saturday, Stockton police got a report of a person shot in a 
busy commercial corridor on the east side of West Lane between East Hammer Lane 
and Knickerbocker Drive. Responding officers found Ramirez on the sidewalk near 
Normandy Village. She was suffering from at least 1 gunshot wound to the head, 
according to authorities. The charge against Corrales implies that the shot 
came from a passing vehicle.

When medics arrived, they declared Ramirez dead at the scene, police reported.

Corrales was arrested Sunday afternoon about 10 miles south of the crime scene 
while driving on Arch Airport Road near Highway 99. The DA's Office reported 
police found a shotgun in his car.

In September 2016, Corrales pleaded no contest - the same as a guilty plea - to 
a felony charge of willful discharge of a firearm in a grossly negligent manner 
and admitted to street gang activity, an enhancement to the charge. With that 
plea, 2 other charges were dismissed and Corrales was sentenced to 16 months 
with a condition that he register as a gang offender. His weapon was ordered 
confiscated and destroyed, according to court documents.

Ultimately, Corrales walked out of jail within hours of sentencing due to time 
already served. But the crime he was convicted of put one strike on his 
criminal record. If convicted of these latest charges, he would get a 2nd 
strike, according to the DA's Office.

In addition to the murder and special circumstances charges, some of the counts 
also leveled against Corrales include suspicion of intentional discharge of a 
firearm causing death, criminal street gang activity and 2 counts of being a 
felon in possession of a firearm (a 9mm semiautomatic handgun and a shotgun).

Authorities have provided no further information, including what crime Ramirez 
may have witnessed and details about Corrales' gang affiliation.

(source: Stockton Record)