[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, GA., ALA., MISS., TENN.

[Rick Halperin]

March 21




TEXAS----new execution date

Execution set for convicted killer of East Texas woman, 93



An East Texas man on death row for the slaying of a 93-year-old woman during a 
robbery at her home has received an execution date.

State District Judge Christi Kennedy signed an order Monday setting 34-year-old 
Clifton Williams for lethal injection June 21 in Huntsville for the fatal 
beating and stabbing of Cecilia Schneider at her home in Tyler in July 2005.

Evidence showed Williams entered through a back door, attacked Schneider and 
then set her body and bed on fire. He fled with her car and her purse 
containing $40. Authorities said he wanted money for drugs. Defense attorneys 
argued he was mentally impaired and ineligible for the death penalty.

Williams came within hours of execution in 2015 when the Texas Court of 
Criminal Appeals halted his scheduled punishment.

(source: Associated Press)

***********************--------impending execution

Texas Court Won't Stop Execution of Lubbock Woman's Killer



The state's top criminal court has refused to halt next week's scheduled 
execution of a San Antonio man convicted of killing a 29-year-old Lubbock 
woman, stuffing her body into a suitcase and then throwing the luggage into the 
trash.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed an appeal Monday from lawyers for 
37-year-old Rosendo Rodriguez III as improper and didn't rule on merits of the 
arguments. Attorneys contended a medical examiner improperly testified at 
Rodriguez's trial, that a recent settlement of a lawsuit involving the examiner 
wasn't disclosed to them, that prosecutors engaged in misconduct and that 
Rodriguez is innocent.

He's set for execution March 27 for the 2005 rape-slaying of Summer Baldwin. He 
also confessed to killing a 16-year-old Lubbock girl who'd been missing for 
more than a year.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Texas death row inmate asks Harris County judge to recuse himself after 
racially charged comments



A death row prisoner is asking state District Judge Michael McSpadden to recuse 
himself from an ongoing appeal in light of a number of racially charged 
statements to the Houston Chronicle that attorneys say call into question the 
jurist's appearance of impartiality.

George Curry, who is black, was sent to death row after he was convicted of 
killing a teenager during a 2009 restaurant robbery in Harris County.

His case is already fraught with racial issues, including claims of jurors who 
searched for a hanging tree in downtown Houston during a break and a family 
history of "racial terror and trauma," according to recent court filings.

But McSpadden's recent comments, defense lawyers argue, could be enough to 
raise questions about whether he could be unbiased in tackling the case.

And that's all that Texas law requires for a recusal. Attorneys don't have to 
show that McSpadden actually is racist, according to Curry's lawyers - they 
just have to show that a reasonable member of the public could have a 
reasonable doubt about the judge's impartiality.

McSpadden did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The filing come weeks after the long-time jurist sparked outcry with a 
controversial explanation of his reasons for not allowing magistrates to grant 
cash-free bail bonds. Most defendants, he said, are "tainted" with extensive 
criminal histories.

"The young black men - and it's primarily young black men rather than young 
black women - charged with felony offenses, they're not getting good advice 
from their parents," he said.

"Who do they get advice from? Rag-tag organizations like Black Lives Matter, 
which tell you, 'Resist police,' which is the worst thing in the world you 
could tell a young black man ... They teach contempt for the police, for the 
whole justice system."

Afterward, the ACLU of Texas called for McSpadden's resignation and asked that 
he automatically be recused from cases involving black defendants pending an 
investigation into potential racial bias.

8 state and local civil rights groups subsequently filed a formal complaint 
with the State Commission on Judicial Conduct asking for an investigation into 
whether McSpadden violated his obligation to remain unbiased.

"This isn't new, but it's jarring to hear a powerful figure in the criminal 
justice system embrace discrimination so openly," Terri Burke, executive 
director for the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement at the time. "It's time we 
took action to end the inequality that black defendants face in courtrooms like 
Judge McSpadden's."

In Curry's case in particular, his attorneys note, there are a number of 
race-specific claims at stake.

A prior appeal argues that Curry's death sentence was unconstitutional because 
it was imposed on the basis of race, and that black defendants are more likely 
to face execution. The earlier filings also claim that the jurors who sentenced 
Curry "demonstrated racial animus when they searched for a hanging tree in 
downtown Houston during a trial break."

"Although Mr. Curry does not contend that Judge McSpadden harbors actual bias 
or prejudice concerning any party, the specific circumstances at issue here 
require recusal," the lawyers write. "And, because this is a death penalty 
case, special caution should be taken to ensure that Mr. Curry's claims are 
adjudicated before a tribunal that is, and has the appearance of being, 
impartial."

Legally speaking, it's appearances that matter.

The Friday filing points to the "sheer volume" of news coverage surrounding the 
controversial remarks, and goes on to quote newspaper articles, the Texas 
Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, and internet commenters as evidence of 
the public's opinion.

"This court does not have to speculate whether a reasonable member of the 
public at large would question Judge McSpadden's impartiality," the filing 
says, "because a significant portion of the public actually does harbor such 
doubt, outside of the advocacy groups themselves."

And, although the initial comment at issue related to pre-trial detainees - not 
convicted prisoners like Curry - internet commenters raised broader questions.

"It is significant that the public's concerns are not limited to Judge 
McSpadden's ability to impartially judge only pre-trial defendants," Curry's 
attorneys write. "Rather, the concerns focus on his ability to impartially 
judge anyone at any point during any proceeding."

The filings don't claim that McSpadden took any specific racist actions in the 
case, and note that he hasn't even made any recent rulings in the matter. And, 
while McSpadden oversaw jury selection earlier in the case, it was Judge Frank 
Price who presided over the trial and punishment.

Curry was convicted in a 2009 Popeye's robbery, when the former fast food 
worker strolled in at closing time, wearing a business suit and holding a gun. 
Although 2 teenage employees survived the hold-up, 19-year-old Edward Virappen 
was killed.

Curry was arrested two months later as the result of a Crime Stoppers tip.

(source: Houston Chronicle)

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

Court findings offer hope for death row inmate in case tainted by 'Dr. Death'



Even after the parole board refused to consider a prosecutor's rare plea for 
clemency, the condemned man at the center of a controversial death row case may 
have another shot at life after a favorable finding in Kerr County court.

Jeff Wood, a Kerrville man with a low IQ, was sent to death row under the 
so-called "law of parties" for his role in a 1996 store robbery gone wrong. As 
the getaway driver, Wood wasn't actually inside the building when Danny Reneau 
fired the shot that killed clerk Kriss Keeran.

In the more than two decades since the slaying, Wood's case has sparked 
criticism from both sides of the political aisle - in part because of his low 
intelligence, in part because he wasn't the shooter, and in part because of 
testimony from a notorious forensic psychiatrist dubbed "Dr. Death" for his 
damning words in more than 100 capital cases.

Though he's not contesting his guilt, Wood is still fighting his capital 
sentence - and last year the Kerr County District Attorney even sided with him, 
penning a plea for clemency on his behalf.

Now, a trial court finding - currently sitting in front of the Texas Court of 
Criminal Appeals for approval - could win him a new punishment phase, partly as 
a result of Dr. James Grigson's allegedly false testimony.

"He has a pretty strong case," said Robert Dunham, executive director of the 
Death Penalty Information Center.

Wood's 1st execution date in 2008 was called off over questions as to mental 
competence. 8 years later, he came within days of death before a state appeals 
court called off his scheduled execution in a 7-2 decision.

In a brief opinion, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals bounced the case back 
to the trial court over concerns that Grigson's claims as to Wood's future 
dangerousness - a key factor in doling out a death sentence - could have been 
false and misleading, constituting a violation of due process.

And if he wasn't really a future danger, then he shouldn't have been eligible 
for a death sentence under Texas law.

Then in March 2017 a lower court judge put things on hold after District 
Attorney Lucy Wilke decided to ask the parole board to consider clemency for 
the condemned man.

In an August 2017 parole board letter co-signed by the chief of police and 
trial court judge, Wilke said that she didn't learn Grigson had been expelled 
from the American Psychiatric Association until well after the trial - and had 
she known, she wouldn't have put him on the stand.

Also, Wilke wrote, the victim's family didn't want a death sentence, Wood 
wasn't the actual shooter, and he'd been well-behaved behind bars. A similar 
set of arguments helped convince the parole board - and eventually Gov. Greg 
Abbott - to side with Thomas Whitaker last month and commute his sentence to 
life less than an hour before a scheduled execution.

But - unlike Whitaker - Wood didn't have an execution on the calendar. And so 
the parole board refused to even consider the request in his case.

"It has been determined that this request does not meet the requirement 
envisioned in Board Rule Section 143.57, Commutation of a Death Sentence to a 
Lesser Penalty, because there is currently no Execution Warrant," the board 
wrote in December.

"Even though Board Rule Section 141. 51 allows the Texas Board of Pardons and 
Paroles to consider a request not contemplated by the rules, it has been 
determined that, in this case, Mr. Wood's request will not be considered by the 
Board at this time."

The board did not offer any additional explanation for its decision, though it 
has at times acted on cases without set executions in the past.

Afterward, both sides went back to the trial court, where a judge approved a 
new set of findings recommending relief - vacating the sentence - for the death 
row prisoner.

If Wood gets off death row over Grigson's testimony, it could have implications 
for other cases hinging on the former psychiatrist's assessments of future 
danger.

"One of the problems that this case poses for prosecutors is that there are 
dozens and dozens of cases in which James Grigson provided false testimony on 
future dangerousness," Dunham said. "He made more than 100 predictions of 
future dangerousness. Grigson didn't get the nickname 'Dr. Death' by accident."

Claiming 100 % accuracy in his predictions, Grigson didn't always personally 
interview the convicted killers he testified about, a pattern that prompted 
reprimands and later expulsion from the American Psychiatric Association.

If the CCA sides with Wood, it could bolster appeals in other cases that 
utilized Grigson's testimony - especially any that relied on his word after he 
was disciplined, Dunham said. It's not clear how many cases that might entail.

And, potentially muddying the waters in Wood's case, prosecutors this year 
filed an objection to the findings they previously agreed to.

It's unclear when a decision might come.

In the meantime, Jeff Wood waits.

(source: Houston Chronicle)

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

State opts against death penalty in 2007 Donna murder case



A man sentenced to death more than a decade ago was given a different type of 
death sentence Monday: life in prison without parole.

Douglas Armstrong was sentenced to life after prosecutors decided not to seek 
the death penalty against him. The 48-year-old won a new punishment trial late 
last year on appeal.

A jury found Armstrong guilty of capital murder in 2007 for killing 60-year-old 
Rafael Castelan of Donna with a box cutter during an alleged robbery the year 
before. Armstrong was sentenced to death for this crime.

He has long maintained his innocence, however, and Maslon LLP - the Minnesota 
law firm representing him pro bono - has argued that someone else killed 
Castelan in a drug deal gone wrong.

According to a Nov. 28, 2017 press release the law firm issued after the Texas 
Court of Criminal Appeals ordered Armstrong's resentencing, Armstrong stumbled 
upon Castelan's body on his way home from a Donna bar. He attempted to walk 
Castelan, who was critically injured, to a nearby hospital but panicked and 
fled after witnesses 'misinterpreted the scene, called the police and drove 
their van at Armstrong."

Armstrong was removed from death row after Maslon's team successfully argued 
that his court-appointed trial attorneys provided ineffective assistance of 
counsel during the conviction and punishment phases of his trial.

"Armstrong's court-appointed lawyers did nothing to prepare Armstrong's 
defense," the press release reads, charging the Hidalgo County defense 
attorneys with only speaking with 2 witnesses, failing to investigate 
Castelan's history of drug dealing and failing to conduct forensic testing on 
the physical evidence related to the murder scene.

Although the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Maslon's attempt to 
overturn Armstrong's guilty verdict, the court ruled that his defense team 
"failed to conduct a constitutionally adequate investigation of mitigating 
evidence that could have been introduced during the punishment phase of his 
trial," namely the physical abuse Armstrong suffered as a child, his history of 
substance abuse and his cognitive impairments.

Castelan's son was present during Monday's sentencing, having traveled to the 
Rio Grande Valley from Chicago, and he expressed anger at the state's decision 
not to seek the death penalty.

"I was hoping to watch you die but obviously somebody felt sorry for you," 
Castelan said to Armstrong during his crime victim statement. "And I don't feel 
sorry for you ... you took my father ..."

Now off death row, Armstrong's legal battle is not over. Maslon noted in its 
November 2017 press release that it "plans to continue its long-standing fight" 
toward exonerating Armstrong.

(source: The Monitor)








GEORGIA:

Black man convicted by all-white jury seeks new trial



Prosecutors in west Georgia focused on the race of black potential jurors as 
they purposely and systematically excluded them from the trials of black men 
facing the death penalty 4 decades ago, lawyers for one of the men said in a 
court filing this week.

An all-white jury in 1977 convicted Johnny Gates of raping and murdering a 
white woman and sentenced him to die. His lawyers have asked a judge for a new 
trial and argued in a court filing Monday that newly disclosed prosecution 
trial notes from a string of capital cases tried in Muscogee County in the late 
1970s, combined with the consistent striking of black jurors, demonstrate 
systematic race discrimination in jury selection.

"When you have this kind of race discrimination infecting a trial from the 
start, it really undermines the reliability of the proceedings all the way 
through," said Patrick Mulvaney, a lawyer with the Southern Center for Human 
Rights who's representing Gates.

Gates, 62, was later resentenced to life in prison without parole. In addition 
to the allegations of racial discrimination during jury selection, other 
reasons he should have a new trial include suppression and destruction of 
evidence and a DNA claim involving evidence taken from the crime scene, 
Mulvaney said. A judge has scheduled a May 7 hearing on the motion for a new 
trial.

The U.S. Supreme Court in May 2016 tossed out the death sentence given to 
Timothy Foster, another black Georgia man convicted and sentenced to die by an 
all-white jury in the killing of a white woman. Chief Justice John Roberts 
wrote in the Foster case that Georgia "prosecutors were motivated in 
substantial part by race" when they struck black potential jurors from the jury 
pool.

Prosecutors in Foster's case, which was tried in north Georgia in 1987, said 
they had eliminated prospective jurors for race-neutral reasons, but their 
notes showed they had marked black prospective jurors with a "B'' in their 
notes, highlighted their names on jury lists and circled their race on juror 
questionnaires.

Douglas Pullen, who was one of the prosecutors in Foster's case, had been one 
of the prosecutors in Gates' trial and in 4 others involving black defendants 
in west Georgia between 1975 and 1979.

After the Supreme Court ruling in Foster's case, Gates' attorneys argued that 
prosecutors had engaged in systematic discrimination during jury selection in 
his case and others and asked the state to provide its jury selection notes. 
The state refused, but the court last month ordered prosecutors to hand over 
the notes, and Gates' attorneys received them on March 2.

Prosecutors wrote "W'' next to the names of white prospective jurors and "N'' 
next to the names of black prospective jurors and also put dots in the margins 
next to black prospective jurors' names, according to Gates' court filing 
Monday. Black prospective jurors were described in the notes as "slow," ''old + 
ignorant," ''cocky," ''con artist," ''hostile" and "fat."

Prosecutors marked all 4 black prospective jurors in Gates' cases as "1'' on a 
scale of 1 to 5 with no explanation, but the only white juror marked "1'' was 
opposed to the death penalty, the court filing says.

In one case, prosecutors kept a tally of the race of the jurors who were 
ultimately selected, with 12 marks in the white column and none in the black 
column.

Pullen was involved in 5 capital trials for black men between 1975 and 1979, 
and the prosecution struck 27 of 27 black prospective jurors in those cases.

His co-counsel, William Smith was involved in 2 of those trials, as well as 2 
other capital trials involving black defendants during that period. In 1 of the 
others, prosecutors struck all of the black prospective jurors. In the fourth 
trial, prosecutors struck 10 black jurors, but there were more black jurors in 
the final jury pool than prosecutors had strikes.

Reached by phone Tuesday, Pullen said he hadn't seen Gates' court filing but 
denied any racial motivation behind the jury strikes, saying several times, "It 
didn't happen." In complex cases where jury selection can stretch several days, 
"there's identifying data on everybody, but it's just so you can remember and 
recollect," he said.

Smith, who's now a senior judge, said he'd been instructed by the Judicial 
Qualifications Commission not to make any public comment on any case that's 
under appeal.

(source: Associated Press)








ALABAMA:

Can Alabama try to kill the same man twice?



Last month, Doyle Lee Hamm became the 4th person in more than 70 years to walk 
away from an execution attempt in the United States.

Alabama Department of Corrections officials called off his lethal injection 
attempt at Holman Correctional Facility shortly before midnight on Feb. 22. 
ADOC officials said it was a time issue - Hamm's death warrant expired at 
midnight - but Hamm's legal team say multiple attempts to set an IV in his 
lower legs and groin led to extreme pain, possible infection and psychological 
distress.

Hamm believes Alabama lost its chance to kill him: His lawyer is arguing in 
court a 2nd execution attempt would violate the constitutional ban on cruel and 
unusual punishment and the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Convicted of killing Cullman motel clerk Patrick Cunningham in 1987, Hamm had 
previously argued his veins were too damaged to access because of a host of 
medical issues.

"For seven months, I warned everyone that attempting intravenous lethal 
injection was going to be a bloody mess," Hamm's lawyer Bernard Harcourt said. 
"Until Feb. 22, this case was what was called a method of execution challenge. 
... On Feb. 22, when everyone ignored my warnings, the case changed completely 
in its character. It???s now a case about not being able to execute a second 
time because of double jeopardy."

Hamm is 1 of 4 American men to walk out of the execution chamber since the 
mid-1900s, and 1 of only 2 still living.

"No court has held that subsequent execution attempts violate the double 
jeopardy clause," said Phyllis Goldfarb, a George Washington University law 
professor. "But it is a viable argument. His attorney is arguing that it was 
foreseeable the execution attempt itself would create a substantial risk of 
severe pain, considering his physical and medical condition."

After a medical evaluation, a judge in 2017 ruled Hamm's upper limbs were off 
limits: Specially trained technicians would need ultrasound guidance to access 
veins in his arms and hands.

ADOC agreed to set an IV in his lower extremities.

A doctor's report commissioned by Hamm's lawyer found Hamm was punctured at 
least 11 times in his lower legs and groin. The procedure was called off after 
Hamm began bleeding from the groin, according to the report, and prison workers 
had to support Hamm as he left the execution chamber. Pictures in the medical 
report show heavy severe bruising, and the report states entry wounds in Hamm's 
groin overlapped so closely it was difficult to count the exact number.

ADOC declined a Montgomery Advertiser request to interview Alabama Corrections 
Commissioner Jeff Dunn, but a spokesman said ADOC disagrees with Harcourt's 
claims about the procedure.

The Alabama attorney general's office had no comment when asked if they were 
pursuing a 2nd execution date. Gov. Kay Ivey's office has not returned request 
for comment.

Precedent for subsequent execution attempts is extremely rare, says Deborah 
Denno, a Fordham University law professor who has studied lethal injection 
procedures nationwide.

For a time in the middle of last century, death traveled around Louisiana on a 
regular parish-to-parish circuit. The state's electric chair, dubbed "Gruesome 
Gertie," relied on courthouses and parish jails as temporary execution 
chambers.

In St. Martinville's parish jail, 17-year-old Willie Francis, convicted of the 
murder of a local pharmacist, waited to be strapped into Gertie.

Typically, an official executioner and the Angola prison warden operated 
Gertie, but they were called away for an emergency meeting the day of Willie's 
execution.

"In their place, the warden sent a prison trusty and an inmate to St. 
Martinville to execute Willie Francis," said Gilbert King, author of "The 
Execution of Willie Francis." "Spectators at the scene observed the two men 
drinking and passing a flask as they set up the chair."

On May 3, 1946, Francis was given last rites before the trusty flipped the 
switch. His body "tensed and stretched," according to eyewitness affidavits 
filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, and the chair bucked on the floor.

But Francis wasn't dying.

"I heard the one in charge yell to the man outside for more juice when he saw 
that Willie Francis was not dying, and the one on the outside yelled back he 
was giving him all he had," Sheriff Harold Resweber testified. The attempt was 
quickly called off.

Louisiana moved to set a new execution date days away, but a local lawyer 
stepped in to fight an appeal. "He felt that a botched execution was a sign 
from God, it was wrong to send this kid back to the chair," King said. The case 
reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where justices voted 5-4 to allow Louisiana a 
second attempt at killing Francis. The court held that the chair's failure was 
an unintentional mistake. During Francis' appeals, the Louisiana legislature 
amended its electrocution statute to restrict who could legally operate the 
chair.

In a 2nd appeal, Willie's lawyers argued the amendment proved the state 
admitted to the incompetence of the execution team and amounted to confessing 
to an error.

But the Supreme Court denied a petition for rehearing, and Francis was executed 
on May 9, 1947.

"Legal issues around execution methods tend to raise questions about the 
morality of the death penalty generally - whether the state should be in the 
business of doing this to people," Goldfarb said. "Issues about whether a 
certain execution method is cruel and unusual punishment tend to raise 
questions about whether the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. They 
tend to be proxy for each other, so judges don't feel they can pass judgment on 
the lawfulness of the death penalty generally."

6 decades later, the Francis v. Resweber decision was cited in the Ohio appeal 
of Romell Broom.

Broom was scheduled to be executed in September 2009 for the 1984 kidnapping, 
rape and murder of a 14-year-old girl. Ohio prison officials spent nearly 2 
hours trying to locate a suitable vein, puncturing Broom at least 18 times 
before the prison warden called off the attempt.

Broom's lawyers fought against a 2nd execution date, arguing it would amount to 
cruel and unusual punishment and double jeopardy.

But Ohio's Supreme Court found that setting an IV is prep for an impending 
execution, not part of the execution itself. An execution can't begin until 
"lethal drugs flow through the tubes," the court found. The U.S. Supreme Court 
in 2016 declined to hear Broom's challenge to a second injection attempt.

The Ohio Supreme Court in 2017 set a new execution date for Broom in June 2020. 
Broom continues to appeal his case. In December 2017, Ohio called off another 
lethal injection attempt after officials were unable to find suitable veins in 
Alva Campbell, an inmate convicted of killing a teenager in 1997 while on 
parole for another murder. Both Campbell and the state had documented concerns 
about the suitability of Campbell's veins. Campbell died of natural causes in 
his cell March 3.

"When they keep on making the same mistake, when they had an expert saying Hamm 
was not physically able to handle these injections, that's not an unintended 
accident. That's extreme reckless disregard for the inmate," Denno said.

Broom, Campbell and Hamm are the most recent known cases to leave the execution 
chamber alive, but death penalty scholars say lethal injection has seen a host 
of problems since its adoption as a modern form of executions.

"Lethal injection, when it doesn't go awry, looks like a medical, sanitized 
death," said Goldfarb.

There's controversy if that's the case, Goldfarb said. One of commonly used 
drugs is a paralytic, so though the outside effect is of someone falling 
asleep, inmates could simply be unable to express pain.

In Alabama, Ronald Bert Smith, executed in 2016, gasped and coughed for 13 of 
the 34 minutes it took to execute him. Last year, Torey McNabb grimaced and 
lifted his arm off the gurney 20 minutes after his execution had begun.

"It might have protected those who had to participate in the execution and 
those who had to witness the execution more than it protected the inmate," 
Goldfarb said.

Research estimates some 7 % of lethal injection in the country have been 
botched in the process, though most are ultimately successful in killing 
inmates.

Alabama uses midazolam in its three-drug execution procedure. The drug has been 
present in botched executions and drawn controversy.

Lethal injection has recently faced legal and logistical challenges in Alabama 
and across the country, particularly over the use of the sedative midazolam. 
American and European drug manufacturers in recent years have begun blocking 
the use of their products in lethal injections.

Older forms of execution are back on the table, Goldfarb said, as states 
grapple with lethal injection issues.

In 2015, Utah resurrected the firing squad. Last week, Oklahoma announced it 
would replace lethal injection with gas inhalation, a method known as nitrogen 
hypoxia.

Though Oklahoma has struggled to obtain execution drugs, Department of 
Corrections Director Joe M. Allbaugh on Friday also cited difficulties with 
setting IVs in inmates, calling Hamm's execution attempt "inhumane."

In Alabama, a bill that would allow Alabama death row prisoners to choose an 
execution by nitrogen has passed the Senate and a House committee. Bill 
sponsore Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Montrose, has called it "more humane" and "less 
invasive."

Nitrogen hypoxia, has never been used in a U.S. execution, despite 2 other 
states who have approved it as an alternate method. Proponents say it's safe, 
painless and easily available on the commercial market. Opponents argue it's 
understudied and would require unethical experimentation before it could be 
used.

Pittman's bill allows for execution by nitrogen hypoxia if lethal injection is 
"held unconstitutional or otherwise becomes unavailable."

For Harcourt, though, the time has passed for alternate execution methods.A 
U.S. District Court judge has set a status conference for July 18 with a 
pretrial conference tentatively set for December 2018.

"The state had its bite at the apple," Harcourt said. "Under the Eighth 
Amendment and double jeopardy, those grounds would bar any other execution at 
this point. The case has changed."

(source: Montgomery Advertiser)

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

Alabama lawmakers approve new method of execution



Alabama lawmakers voted Tuesday to allow the use of nitrogen gas to execute 
death row inmates, a method that has so far not been used to carry out a death 
sentence.

The Alabama House of Representatives approved the measure on a 75-23 vote. A 
spokesman for Gov. Kay Ivey said the governor will review the bill before 
making a decision whether to sign it into law.

The bill would allow executions by asphyxiating inmates with nitrogen gas if 
lethal injection drugs are unavailable or lethal injection is ruled 
unconstitutional. Supporters argued the state needs another method of carrying 
out death sentences as drug companies become hesitant to supply chemicals for 
executions and lethal injection faces continued court challenges.

"It would simply put him to sleep. It's humane. It's quick, and it's painless," 
Republican Rep. Jim Hill of Moody said during debate.

Opponents of the bill questioned how lawmakers could assert it would be 
painless since the method hasn't been tried.

"We had Yellow Mama. Now, we are going to bring back the gas chamber," Rep. 
Thomas Jackson, a Democrat from Thomasville, said referencing the nickname for 
the state's yellow-painted electric chair.

The Death Penalty Information Center said that no state has carried out an 
execution by nitrogen gas. 2 states - Oklahoma and Mississippi - have voted to 
authorize execution by nitrogen gas as a backup method of execution, according 
to center.

Oklahoma announced last week that it will begin using nitrogen for executions, 
when the state resumes death sentences, because of difficulty obtaining lethal 
injection drugs.

Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter said then that the execution procedure 
would likely involve the use of a mask placed over the inmate's head, but he 
said the details would have to be worked out.

(source: Associated Press)








MISSISSIPPI:

Death sentence reinstated for Mississippi's only woman on death row



The 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has reinstated the death sentence of Lisa 
Jo Chamberlin, Mississippi's only female death row inmate.

The ruling Tuesday came almost 3 years after a federal court ruling granting 
her a new trial in a double homicide in Hattiesburg.

The full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with the exception of Judge James 
Graves who recused himself, reviewed the judge's ruling and a ruling by a 
3-judge panel of the court that voted 2-1 to affirm the ruling.

On a motion by the Mississippi attorney general's office, the 5th Circuit 
agreed to hear the case.

Special Assistant Attorney General Cameron Benton argued the 2 U.S. Court of 
Appeals judges put together unimpressive statistics and an incomplete 
comparative analysis to find the existence of discrimination in the striking of 
2 black prospective jurors.

"There is ample proof in the record to suggest that the exercise of peremptory 
strikes was not motivated by racial animus," Benton said in court papers. 
"Given the dearth of proof and the deference owed to the State Court, the 
Majority opinion seems to have improperly substituted its judgment for that of 
the trial judge and appellate court."

In 2015, U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves ordered the state to grant 
Chamberlin a new trial within 4 months, saying prosecutors intentionally struck 
black potential jurors from her capital murder trial.

Chamberlin is white. She argued on appeal that her rights were violated by 
prosecutors striking some black potential jurors for non-racial neutral 
reasons.

But the 5th Circuit 9-to-5 ruling Tuesday said, "The prosecution in 
Chamberlin's case did what it was supposed to do: it rejected some black 
prospective jurors and accepted others, accepted some white prospective jurors 
and rejected others. When asked why it struck individual black prospective 
jurors, it gave specific race-neutral reasons for the strikes."

The 5 who opposed reinstating Chamberlin's conviction said: "The prosecution 
struck nearly 2 times as many black jurors as it accepted (8 strikes compared 
to 5 accepted, including 1 alternate), while accepting more than 4 times as 
many white jurors as it struck (5 strikes compared to 23 accepted, including 3 
alternates). It exercised 62 % of its strikes on black jurors, despite black 
jurors making up only 31 % of qualified prospective jurors.

"This racial breakdown of the strikes is even more telling when compared with 
the results random strikes would predict. Given the demographics of the venire, 
the probability that random, race-neutral strikes would result in 8 of the 13 
struck jurors being black was about 1 in a 100."

Chamberlin and her boyfriend, Roger Lee Gillett, were convicted of 2 counts of 
capital murder in the March 2004 slayings of Gillet's cousin, Vernon Hulett, 
34, and Hulett's girlfriend, Linda Heintzelman, 37, in Hattiesburg. Their 
bodies were transported to Kansas in a freezer.

Gillett and Chamberlin were arrested March 29, 2004, after Kansas Bureau of 
Investigation agents raided an abandoned farmhouse near Russell, Kansas, owned 
by Gillett's father, and found the dismembered bodies of Hulett and Heintzelman 
in a freezer.

KBI agents were investigating Gillett and Chamberlin for their possible 
connection to the manufacture of methamphetamine, according to published 
reports.

Gillett and Chamberlin were living with Hulett and Heintzelman in Hattiesburg 
at the time of the slayings.

Chamberlin, in a taped confession played at her trial, said the victims were 
killed because they wouldn't open a safe in Hulett's home.

Chamberlain was sentenced to death row in 2006, and Gillett was sentenced in 
2007.

However, Gillett's death sentence was later overturned by the Mississippi 
Supreme Court. The court said an escape couldn't be used as a crime of violence 
to support a death sentence.

Chamberlin filed a post-conviction challenge to her conviction in 2011 in U.S. 
District Court after the state Supreme Court upheld her conviction and death 
sentence.

One of the claims was that the prosecution improperly struck 7 
African-Americans from serving on her jury. The prosecutor said he struck 12 
potential jurors - 7 black and 5 white. He denied any effort to strike 
potential jurors based upon race.

Reeves said federal law requires in death penalty cases that comparative 
analysis be done when black potential jurors are struck compared to white 
jurors allowed to remain in the jury pool.

(source: clarionledger.com)

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

Report: Low pay and fear of judges handcuff public defenders



Mississippi's rickety system of providing lawyers to indigent people accused of 
crimes is rife with major failings, according to a study commissioned by a 
state task force.

Released Monday, the study by the Sixth Amendment Center finds that indigent 
defense lawyers fear upsetting the judges who appoint them if they fight hard 
for their clients. It also says people fall into a "black hole" while jailed 
between arrest and indictment, and that defenders' pay may cause them to skimp 
on work.

"When a state chooses to place this responsibility on its local governments, 
then the state must guarantee that the local governments are not only capable 
of providing adequate representation, but also that they are in fact doing so," 
states the Boston-based center, which advocates for the right to counsel. "The 
State of Mississippi has no method of ensuring that its local governments meet 
the state's constitutional obligations."

Authors call for the state to spend more on indigent defense, which could 
require an increase in state spending. It also calls for Mississippi to track 
caseloads and ban arrangements where lawyers are paid a set amount to represent 
an unlimited number of clients. Many counties use that arrangement to employ 
part-time public defenders.

Supreme Court Presiding Justice James Kitchens, a member of the task force that 
commissioned the study, said he wants all the counties in the state to move to 
full-time public defenders, a system only seven of Mississippi's 82 counties 
now use.

"We are lagging very behind in our obligation to provide counsel to people who 
can't afford counsel," Kitchens said.

State Public Defender Andre De Gruy said he hopes the task force that 
commissioned the report will submit a bill for legislators to pass. However, 
bills to extend the task force have died in the current Legislature, meaning 
there may be no voice to advocate for the issue going forward. De Gruy's office 
handles death penalty cases and felony appeals for defendants who lack money, 
and is supposed to train other public defenders.

If things don't improve, the report notes the state could end up getting sued, 
as a number of other states have. Advocates already successfully sued a 
4-county judicial circuit in east-central Mississippi over courts' failures to 
appoint lawyers, set affordable bail or indict people in a timely manner.

Public defenders are typically hired by judges, and risk being fired if they 
fall out of the judges' good graces. Public defenders told interviewers that 
"You can't make waves" in court.

"What's the most critical finding? I think the lack of independence," De Gruy 
said.

Most defenders are either paid a set amount per year to handle an unlimited 
number of cases with private work on the side or $1,000 per case plus hourly 
overhead. In either situation, lawyers have incentives to spend as little time 
as possible on cases to maximize income from other clients.

Perverse pay incentives are complicated by the lack of any system to monitor 
caseloads and prevent overwork. The report did not produce hard statistics, but 
estimated public defenders in many of 10 counties that it closely examined were 
overloaded, compared to national standards.

The report also notes that it could find no county where public defenders 
routinely advocate for people between their arrest and indictment. The 
Associated Press in 2016 highlighted that problem in the case of a woman jailed 
for 96 days without seeing a judge in Choctaw County.

A lack of help for public defenders is also a serious problem. Maybe most 
serious is that part-time and per-case lawyers aren't provided money for 
investigators who can track down and interview witnesses and evaluate crime 
scenes. That can put the defense at a major disadvantage when compared to the 
resources of police, state agencies and investigators who work for district 
attorneys.

"We're talking about leveling the playing field and giving defendants 
resources," Kitchens said.

(source: Associated Press)








TENNESSEE----2 new execution dates

Supreme Court Sets 2 More Execution Dates



On Thursday, the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the Tennessee Attorney 
General's call to set execution dates for 8 inmates before June 1.

Attorney General Herbert Slatery called for the expedited executions in a 
motion filed in February. The new timeline was needed, Slatery said, because of 
issues getting access to drugs state officials would need for the executions.

But the court did set execution dates for 2 of the men in Slatery's request.

"On its own initiative," the court ordered the execution of death row inmate 
Edmund Zagorski on Oct. 11, 2018. Zagorski was convicted of the 1983 murders of 
2 men during a bogus drug deal and received 2 death sentences.

The court also ordered inmate David Earl Miller to be executed on Dec. 6, 2018. 
Miller was convicted of the 1981 murder of a mentally disabled young woman, 
according to a statement from the court.

Earlier this year, the court set an execution date of August, 9, 2018, for 
condemned inmate Billy Ray Irick.

Tennessee has not executed an inmate since 2009.

(source: memphisflyer.com)