[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TENN., MO., NEB., NEV., CALIF., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

May 10


TENNESSEE----stay of execution

Death Penalty Stayed For Convicted Killer



The death penalty is legal in Tennessee, but it's been 9 years since the state 
carried out a capital sentence. A combination of legal challenges and shortages 
of one of the drugs used to carry out lethal injections has meant that Cecil 
Johnson was the last person to be put to death in Tennessee. He was convicted 
of murdering 3 people in 1980.

That was all supposed to change Wednesday.

James Hawkins was scheduled to be put to death at Riverbend Maximum Security 
Prison for the 2011 killing of the mother of his 3 children in Shelby County.

However, a judge stepped in.

A Memphis judge issued a stay of execution for Hawkins last month, as the legal 
process plays out, as appeals are pending. He's set to be in front of a judge 
in June.

(source: newschannel5.com)








MISSOURI:

Defense motion in capital murder case seeks mental health records of victim



Attorneys for capital murder defendant Stephen Thompson are seeking Missouri 
Department of Social Services files on the son and stepchildren of Thompson and 
his wife, Kristina, as well as any state files on Carissa Gerard, his wife's 
lover and the woman he is accused of fatally shooting.

Thompson, 57, is scheduled to go to trial in September 2019 on counts of 
1st-degree murder, domestic assault and armed criminal action in the shotgun 
slaying of Gerard, 38, and critical wounding of his estranged wife 3 years ago 
at a house on the west side of Joplin where the two women were living.

The Jasper County prosecutor's office has filed an intent to seek the death 
penalty in the case.

Thomas Jacquinot, lead attorney for the defense, filed a motion April 17 
looking to obtain the state's files not only on the son and stepchildren of the 
defendant but also on Gerard, including any medical and mental health records.

The motion argues that on the date of the double shooting, June 10, 2015, the 
Thompsons were separated, and Gerard and Kristina Thompson were living together 
in the house at 4215 W. 26th Place that the Thompsons shared previously with 
their son.

The document further states that the Thompsons' relationship was "in a severe 
state of deterioration." Both were using illicit drugs, and the state had 
removed their preschool-age boy from their custody because of their unfitness 
as parents, the motion states.

In the meantime, Kristina Thompson had begun a relationship with Gerard, 
according to the document.

The motion states: "Investigation, discovery and records available to both 
parties suggest that Thompson, his wife (K.T.) and his wife's paramour (C.G.) 
all (suffered) from mental illness."

The document argues that an understanding of the mental health histories of all 
3 principals in the case "will help a jury understand the intense 
dysfunctionality surrounding this love triangle."

Jacquinot indicates in the motion that prior counsel for his client sought the 
social services records of the son and received "only a limited and redacted 
version of the file, with some of the redaction seeming arbitrary and 
unnecessary." He wants a court order to obtain the complete case file.

Additional requests for social services records of Kristina Thompson's children 
from a prior relationship along with state records on Gerard appear to be an 
expansion of the defense's inquiries in the discovery phase of the case. The 
motion points out that while the guilt or innocence phase of a capital murder 
trial focuses on what happened, the sentencing phase "covers an expanse that 
goes well beyond the crime."

The motion states that at the time of the offenses, the defendant "was severely 
distressed over the loss of his marriage and his child."

The document reads: "He did seek help to deal with the situation, but allegedly 
he lost all self-control, committed 2 unthinkable acts of domestic violence, 
and then called police to turn himself in and confess. No jury can be fully 
informed regarding a life and death sentencing determination unless they fully 
understand the background and limitations of (Gerard), (Kristina Thompson) and 
(Stephen Thompson)."

Affidavit

A probable-cause affidavit filed with capital murder charges against Stephen 
Thompson states that he drove 96 miles to obtain a 12-gauge shotgun and bought 
shells for the weapon in Grove, Oklahoma, before coming back to Joplin and 
proceeding to his estranged wife's home. Police say he shot Carissa Gerard 
first, then turned the gun on Kristina Thompson and shot her "numerous times 
while she was fleeing from him."

(source: Joplin Globe)








NEBRASKA:

Nebraska Supreme Court orders lawyer to respond on behalf of inmate in line for 
execution



The Nebraska Supreme Court has ordered a public legal office to represent death 
row inmate Carey Dean Moore as the state seeks a warrant for his execution.

The court said Wednesday the Nebraska Commission on Public Advocacy remains the 
attorney of record for the 60-year-old inmate, who has said he does not want to 
fight Nebraska's efforts to carry out his death sentence.

The commission, a state office that defends indigent clients against serious 
felony charges, provided representation for Moore in 2011, the last time the 
state sought to execute him. The Supreme Court pointed to a line from a Dec. 
15, 2011, motion in which Moore said he desired "to continue allowing my 
attorney of record to continue representing my interests."

The high court ordered the commission to respond by May 29 to the state's 
motion for an execution warrant.

Jeff Pickens, the commission's executive director, said Wednesday he will 
consult with Moore. Pickens had previously thought his office no longer 
represented Moore because the last legal issue in the case from 2011 was never 
appealed.

"The Supreme Court says we're counsel of record, so we're counsel of record," 
Pickens said.

Attorney General Doug Peterson filed a motion to carry out Moore's execution on 
April 3. The attorney general is working to carry out Nebraska's 1st execution 
in 21 years and the state's first execution by lethal injection.

2 lawsuits are currently pending in the courts that challenge the validity of 
the death penalty in Nebraska. Moore, however, has not been willing to be a 
plaintiff in those cases.

The longest serving of the 11 men on Nebraska's death row, Moore was sentenced 
to death for the 1979 slayings of Omaha cabdrivers Reuel Van Ness and Maynard 
Helgeland.

(source: Omaha World-Herald)

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

State more committed to executions than transparency



This week, Nebraskans learned that their elected and appointed officials are 
willing to go to court so they don't have to disclose information on the death 
penalty protocol.

That desire to cling to silence - and the lengths to which the state will go to 
maintain it - speaks volumes.

A lawsuit filed Tuesday by Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and 
Department of Correctional Services Director Scott Frakes doubles down on 
previous efforts to stonewall these details. A legislative committee voted to 
subpoena Frakes for an upcoming hearing in pursuit of more information on how 
it obtained and tested the drugs, and the pair is suing to quash the subpoena.

This can't be stated loudly - or plainly - enough: Had the state merely been 
transparent about how it obtained and tested its 4-drug cocktail, neither these 
lawsuits nor the subpoena would exist.

Nebraskans deserve to know how their officials planned to carry out the capital 
punishment voters reinstated. Their vote to overturn the Legislature's ban on 
the death penalty didn't absolve the state of responsibility to follow the law 
in carrying out that sentence - one it already botched in its failed, costly 
attempts to import drugs from India a few years back.

The power of life and death is a tremendous one. As such, it must be as 
transparent as possible.

Perhaps that's what makes this lawsuit and the state's repeated, yet 
unjustified, claims to the contrary so disappointing. The 2 prime arguments 
cited in the 39-page complaint, too, don't justify keeping the capital 
punishment process entirely in the dark.

First, legislative committees have previously used the exact same powers 
enumerated by the law Peterson and Frakes are now challenging to subpoena 
information related to Corrections. In 2014, the special committee convened to 
address Nebraska's early prison release debacle issued a subpoena to then-Gov. 
Dave Heineman. He testified for 7 hours after volunteering to appear even 
without one.

Furthermore, matters relating to crime and punishment have always gone before 
the Legislature's Judiciary Committee. Jockeying to have legislation referred 
to a more favorable committee is nothing new for senators, but a lawsuit to 
mandate an assignment is simply stunning.

By no means is the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services a stranger to 
being sued. But the agency remains flat-out wrong in claiming of an exemption 
to state public records laws. That has generated several lawsuits, including 
one in which the Journal Star is among the plaintiffs.

Yet, as the number and height of hurdles between Nebraska and its 1st execution 
since 1997 continue to grow, state officials continue to escalate their 
attempts to keep secret vital details about its new lethal injection protocol.

State officials are clearly committed to killing Nebraska's 11 death-row 
inmates. It's a shame they're not nearly as committed to transparency in that 
process.

(source: Lincoln Journal Star editorial board)








NEVADA:

Making sense of death as penalty



As the Nevada Supreme Court hears the gruesome arguments this week about how 
the state can best kill convicted murderer Scott Dozier, it's worth reexamining 
why Nevada continues to insist on executions for capital crimes instead of 
using the more sensible punishment of life in prison without the possibility of 
parole for those society has judged unworthy of life.

Because pharmaceutical manufacturers have now prohibited the more common drugs 
for this purpose, the Dozier appeal involves the use of an experimental drug 
cocktail as the means of execution. It's worth noting that Dozier, like 11 of 
the 12 people executed in Nevada since the death penalty was reinstated in 
1976, is a "volunteer" in that he has chosen to give up his appeals in favor of 
a state-sponsored death. But since Nevada no longer has access to the drugs 
needed to carry out his execution, the state is attempting to use an unproven 
combination of drugs, some of which have already expired and cannot be 
repurchased, spending enormous amounts of time and money to litigate and 
possibly carry out an execution that will not make us any safer. What a mess.

The death penalty is in decline around the country and for good reason. New 
Hampshire is the latest state to vote for repeal, with a bill passed by both 
legislative bodies now headed to the governor's desk to replace the death 
penalty with life without parole. The bill passed just short of a two-thirds 
majority, giving Governor Chris Sununu the ability to veto the measure, which 
he has vowed to do, even though it reflects the growing sentiment of voters who 
are tired of this costly and ineffective punishment.

Republicans have led the effort to repeal the death penalty in New Hampshire, 
arguing that the state doesn't have the millions of dollars it needs to fund 
the legal costs associated with the death penalty or build an execution 
chamber.

Polls consistently show that support for the death penalty is decreasing and is 
now at its lowest level since 1972. If people are asked whether they support 
the alternative of life without parole, support decreases even more, especially 
if the sentence also includes a restitution requirement. Most Americans have 
evolved beyond the need for an "eye for an eye," realizing an enlightened 
society can separate dangerous and violent criminals from society without 
killing them.

The voluntary deaths sought by death row inmates is likened by many to assisted 
suicide. According to Nevada lawyer Scott Coffee in an interview with the 
Marshall Project, "We don't kill them in Nevada unless they agree to it. What 
you've got with Dozier is state-assisted suicide."

In the Dozier case, it was revealed during the mitigation phase that as a child 
he was sexually abused by teenagers in his neighborhood, with one psychologist 
diagnosing him with "elements of antisocial personality disorder with 
narcissistic traits." According to the Marshall Project, there are many 
suicides in his family history, including a grandfather.

The Nevada Legislature should follow the lead of New Hampshire and take up the 
death penalty in the 2019 session and have the serious bipartisan conversation 
our state deserves about this costly and ineffective practice. Instead of 
spending so much money pursuing death penalty sentences, we could redirect 
these resources into mental health care and other preventive mechanisms to 
decrease crime and strengthen our communities. And we should decline to 
participate in the suicidal wishes of heinous criminals.

Dozier himself accurately summed up the insanity of trying to implement the 
death penalty in these conflicted times when he told the Marshall Project, 
"They spent millions of dollars giving me a death sentence, and then millions 
of dollars not killing me. It doesn't make any fucking sense."

(source: Opinion, Sheila Leslie, newsreivew.com)








CALIFORNIA:

25 years on death row - then freed: The system is broken



What ails our criminal justice system? Defense attorney Dean Strang, made 
famous in the Netflix documentary series "Making a Murderer," says it???s a 
"tragic lack of humility" and an "unwarranted certitude on the part of police 
officers and prosecutors and defense lawyers and judges and jurors that they're 
getting it right."

Strang's diagnosis was confirmed in California recently, when my client Vicente 
Benavides walked out of San Quentin State Prison, exonerated after languishing 
on death row for more than a quarter-century. This was a victory for justice, 
but no one should take Benavides' release as an indication that the system 
works in California better than anywhere else.

Sentenced to death

In 1993, Benavides was sentenced to death for a crime he did not commit: 
sexually assaulting his girlfriend's 21-month-old daughter so violently that 
she died. He always maintained his innocence. He had no prior criminal history, 
no history of violence or sexual deviance. By everyone's account, he had always 
been kind and caring toward the child and others.

Nonetheless, he was convicted based on the testimony of several doctors who 
confidently concluded that the child had been sexually abused. One doctor 
testified that he believed it "without a doubt," claiming that this was the 
worst case of child sexual abuse he had ever seen. Another doctor showed the 
jury how he believed Benavides sodomized the child while she was sitting on his 
lap. A 3rd doctor told the jurors the child had been repeatedly sodomized. 
After viewing the graphic photos of the child's genitalia purportedly showing 
the effects of the abuse, the last holdout juror voted to condemn Benavides to 
death.

When my colleagues and I at the Habeas Corpus Resource Center were appointed to 
represent Benavides in 1999, he already had been on death row for 6 years. We 
began by obtaining every piece of paper related to the child's medical 
treatment during the 8 days she spent at 3 hospitals before she succumbed to 
her injuries. We tracked down the doctors who had testified and showed them the 
complete medical records, which they had not seen before they took the witness 
stand.

These records unequivocally showed that the child had no signs of sexual abuse 
when she was admitted to the emergency room of the first hospital. The records 
also showed that the injuries observed at the 2nd and 3rd hospital, that were 
in the photographs shown to jurors, likely resulted from medical procedures 
undertaken in the emergency room of the 1st hospital and the child's 
deteriorating medical condition.

Doctors recant

The doctors who previously had been so certain about their diagnosis realized 
they had made a grave mistake. They recanted their testimony. The prosecution's 
star witness, a child abuse pediatrician, proclaimed that the case was a 
"tremendous failing of the criminal justice system."

In March, the California Supreme Court unanimously reversed Benavides' 
conviction, finding that the false evidence presented at his trial was 
"extensive, pervasive and impactful." At oral argument, Justice Carol A. 
Corrigan, who is a former prosecutor, said the case was among the most 
"hair-raising false evidence" cases she had ever encountered. On April 19, 
prosecutors dismissed all charges and Benavides was released.

Benavides, 42 at the time of his conviction, is now 68. He can never regain the 
years he lost.

If Proposition 66 had been in place during his appeal, Benavides may well have 
been executed rather than exonerated. That law, which accelerates the death 
penalty review process and lowers the qualifications for defense attorneys, was 
passed by 51 % of California voters in November 2016.

It took us almost 2 decades of unrelenting effort to overcome the "unwarranted 
certitude" of the police, the prosecutors and the medical experts in Benavides' 
case. The state attorney general did not admit the conviction was based on 
false evidence until 2015, even though we had presented proof that the 
testimony was false over a decade earlier.

Without providing sufficient time to adequately investigate capital cases, as 
well as additional resources to defense attorneys and the courts, Proposition 
66 will not fix California's dysfunctional death penalty system.

According to the bipartisan California Commission on the Fair Administration of 
Justice, there are only 2 possible solutions: Provide almost $100 million more 
in funding a year to ensure that the system is fair, or eliminate the death 
penalty.

5 exonerated

In 2012, Gov. Jerry Brown blithely dismissed the possibility that innocent 
people have been sentenced to death in California. He said, "I know people say, 
'Oh, there have been all these innocent people.' Well, I have not seen one name 
on death row that's been told to me."

He has been told one now. Benavides is, in fact, the 5th death row inmate to be 
exonerated in California.

Brown and the California Supreme Court should commute all death row sentences 
before the governor's term ends in January. They can no longer share in the 
unwarranted certitude that the criminal justice system is infallible.

(source: Cristina Borde is a former Habeas Corpus Resource Center attorney for 
Vicente Benavides. She currently is the director of the Wisconsin Latino 
Exoneration Program at the Wisconsin Innocence Project----Herald and News)








OREGON:

Governors' oath includes death penalty: Letter to the editor



I understand Gov. Kate Brown and former Gov. John Kitzhaber's aversion to 
signing death warrants. I would have similar qualms. But they took an oath to 
uphold the laws and constitution of the state of Oregon. If they couldn't, in 
good conscience, uphold those laws, they should not have taken the oath. The 
most useful thing about the death penalty in Oregon is that people agree to 
true life sentences to avoid it. Before the voters reinstated the death 
penalty, a life sentence in Oregon often meant parole at some point.

Robert Dyson, Northeast Portland

(source: Letter to the Editor, The Oregonian)








USA:

Jury drawing for Fell retrial is scheduled



The federal judge scheduled to hear the Donald Fell case has issued an order 
that could set a jury draw for the death-penalty for September.

Fell, 38, was already convicted in 2005 of kidnapping Terry King, 53, of North 
Clarendon, and killing her in New York state. He was sentenced to death in 
2006, but the conviction was overturned after it was learned one of the jurors 
went to the crime scene, on his own, and talked to the other jurors about what 
he saw.

A retrial, for felony charges of carjacking and kidnapping with death 
resulting, has been in the works since 2014. Federal prosecutors have already 
announced their plans to seek the death penalty again.

The case has been further complicated because Fell's childhood friend, Robert 
Lee, who allegedly took part in King's kidnapping and death, died in prison.

King was taken from the Rutland Shopping Plaza to New York, which allowed the 
case to be prosecuted under federal law.

Vermont does not allow the death penalty on state charges. The last person 
executed by the state was in 1954.

Prosecutors said Fell and Lee went to New York because they were fleeing the 
area after killing Fell's mother, Debra Fell, and her friend, Charles Conway, 
in Rutland.

Fell and Lee were arrested in Arkansas.

In a decision dated Monday, U.S. District Judge Geoffrey Crawford said he 
expects the case to come back to his court no later than July 23.

In February 2017, it was estimated that choosing a jury would take 3 to 4 
weeks.

Questionnaires will be presented to prospective jurors on July 23. Last year, 
the federal court was anticipating a jury pool of at least 3,000 Vermonters.

Last year, the case was sent to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second 
Circuit to argue whether statements made by Lee could be used in Fell's 2nd 
trial. That issue has yet to be decided.

Crawford's order said that if the case does not come back to U.S. District 
Court, the jury selection and questionnaire process will be suspended.

The 2nd trial has been delayed several times. In August, Crawford released an 
order saying he anticipated the trial might be delayed at least a year.

There have been multiple motions filed by lawyers for the prosecution and 
defense, arguing a variety of questions, such as whether photos of King when 
she was alive could be used, whether the death penalty could be allowed and if 
the trial should be moved out of Rutland.

One argument made for moving the case - a motion that was denied - was that the 
federal courthouse is not far from the parking lot where King was abducted, 
which resulted in the juror visiting that area in the earlier trial and the 
court subsequently overturning Fell's conviction.

The federal prosecutors handling the case could not be reached Wednesday.

Attorney John Phillipsborn, who is part of the defense team, said Fell's 
attorneys couldn't comment on the case.

(source: Rutland Herald)