[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KY., TENN., WYO., NEV., CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

May 1



KENTUCKY:

Prosecutor: Daviess Co. sees most death penalties at once in history



Matt Adams, Arnett Baines and Cylar Shemwell are all now facing the death 
penalty. All 3 charged with murder.

“We have not had this type of violence in Daviess County at any point in 
history that I know of," Bruce Kuegel the Commonwealth’s attorney said.

Kuegel has served as the commonwealth attorney in Daviess county for the past 
11 years. He says he doesn’t remember a time when so many murders have 
happened.

“We’re at a level now that’s just unheard of," he said. "And it’s staggering to 
us.”

He shares that death penalty cases often take a long time to prepare. Baines' 
trial is set for March of 2021. Kuegel says there is so much evidence to go 
through in these cases.

“We’re in uncharted territory," Kuegel said. "We have never experienced this 
many death penalty cases at the same time.”

And while Kuegel is seeking the ultimate penalty in these cases, it doesn’t 
always mean death for the defendant. Filing the death penalty adds 2 additional 
penalties, life in prison without parole or 25 years in prison before parole is 
considered.

To file for the death penalty in Kentucky, the crime must have specific 
aggravated circumstances. But for Kuegel, he says it's not something he files 
without considering everyone involved.

“You have to be cognizant of the effect that this is having on the families," 
Kuegel said. "And by the same token, you have to look at the effect that it’s 
having on the community and what the community expects.”

(source: WFIE news)








TENNESSEE:

Death penalty an option for Middle Tennessee man accused of killing 7



The death penalty could be an option for a Sumner County man accused of the 
worst homicide event in Tennessee's last 20 years.

Sumner County District Attorney Ray Whitley says the death penalty is an option 
for Michael Cummins, the man accused of killing 7 people in Westmoreland over 
the weekend. Among those killed by blunt force trauma include Cummins' mother, 
father, and uncle.

Cummins has not been officially charged due to being in the hospital and 
waiting on the Medical Examiner's findings. Once he is released, Cummins will 
be charged with probation violation. The DA will then use information from the 
Medical Examiner to determine other charges.

According to the Medical Examiner's report released on Tuesday, all seven 
victims in the Westmoreland killings died from multiple blunt force injuries 
and some of the victims also had sharp force injuries.

(source: Fox News)








WYOMING:

Group seeking to eliminate death penalty in Wyoming kicks off effort



The diverse group behind the push to end Wyoming’s death penalty has geared up 
for a significant push to pass a bill by the end of the 2020 legislative 
session.

The Wyoming ACLU, League of Women Voters, Wyoming NAACP and representatives 
from the Catholic Diocese of Cheyenne, Holy Apostles Orthodox Christian Church 
of Cheyenne and other religious groups announced their intent to push for a 
repeal bill in the 2020 budget session.

“When we continue to allow the laws that allow for the death penalty to exist, 
as people were saying, this is being done in our name,” said Sabrina King, 
director of campaigns for the ACLU of Wyoming, during a Tuesday news conference 
in Cheyenne.

“It’s incumbent on us to ensure that the laws that exist are the laws we feel 
are ... are doing the work that we believe in,” King said. “All the people who 
are standing here, and all of us who will be working on this over the course of 
the next year, are becoming part of a movement that has been going on, frankly, 
for decades and centuries.”

The group wants to capitalize on the efforts of the 2019 legislative session 
that saw a repeal bill fail 18-12 in the Senate. House Bill 145 was able to 
pass out of the House on a 36-21 vote, however.

That type of success surprised supporters and encouraged them to continue to 
push the issue into the 2020 budget session.

“We went further with more votes than we’ve had before, and we realized how 
much actual support is in the Legislature, and outside, as well,” said 
Marguerite Herman, lobbyist for the League of Women Voters of Wyoming. “This is 
not just tilting at windmills. We think we have a good chance to get the votes. 
We’re going to have to turn some minds and turn some hearts. But we think we 
can do it.”

Rep. Jared Olsen, R-Cheyenne, sponsored HB 145, and said Tuesday the success of 
repealing the death penalty in Wyoming would hinge on educating not only 
lawmakers, but also the state as a whole.

“I think the difference between success and failure is education. I watched 
that unfold throughout the session,” Olsen said. “I watched it unfold for 
myself.”

Olsen pointed to how his own views evolved on the issue, going from a death 
penalty supporter to the lawmaker who sponsored the repeal bill.

He said he was swayed by the financial cost to the state – about $1 million 
annually just to have it on the books – by the moral quandary of allowing the 
state to take a life, and the fact that more than 160 people have been wrongly 
convicted and sentenced to death in the United States before eventually being 
exonerated.

“I began to learn that the system was broken. Even if we had failed just one 
time and there was one exoneree in the United States, I think the system would 
be broken,” Olsen said.

The effort will face a hurdle trying to get a bill passed during the 2020 
budget session. A 2/3 vote of support is required for a non-budget bill to get 
introduced, something Herman said she believed they’ll be able to muster in the 
House.

“We’re thinking 2020 does actually have a good chance. There’s a lot of time 
before the budget is taken up, which sucks up all the air in the room. There’s 
a period during which I think there’s a little bit of time to discuss some 
fairly substantive issues,” Herman said. “We’re committed to pursuing it until 
we succeed. We’re not looking at this as an intermediate stop, but it may turn 
out to be.”

Even though the 2020 budget session only lasts about a month, Herman said the 
effort would benefit from all the discussion and education that occurred this 
past session.

Since 1976, Wyoming has only executed 1 person: Mark Hopkinson, who was put to 
death in 1992. One inmate, Dale Wayne Eaton, had his death sentence overturned 
in 2014.

(source: Wyoming Tribune Eagle)








NEVADA:

Defense lawyers challenge Nevada death penalty law



Lawyers defending a man in a capital murder case are challenging Nevada's death 
penalty law using an unusual argument.

They want a judge in Las Vegas to declare capital punishment unconstitutional 
because they say the 2 most powerful Democrats in the state Legislature killed 
discussion about 2 measures that aimed to repeal it.

A court filing last week on behalf of Alonso Perez argues that because Senate 
Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro and Assembly Speaker Jason Frierson are 
deputy Clark County district attorneys, they made sure the death penalty repeal 
bills never got a hearing.

Perez's assigned lawyers allege that amounts to improper interference in the 
lawmaking process by the 2 career prosecutors who serve as part-time 
legislators.

Cannizzaro and Frierson didn't immediately respond on Monday to messages about 
the lawsuit.

(source: Las Vegas Sun)

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

Lawyers in murder cases ask judge to kill death penalty



Lawyers defending a man in 3 murder cases want a judge to declare capital 
punishment unconstitutional in Nevada after the two most powerful Democrats in 
the state Legislature, who also work as prosecutors, killed measures that aimed 
to repeal it.

A court filing on behalf of 27-year-old defendant Alonso Perez argues that 
because Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro and Assembly Speaker Jason 
Frierson are deputy Clark County district attorneys, they made sure the death 
penalty repeal bills didn't get a hearing.

Perez's assigned lawyers, led by JoNell Thomas, alleged improper interference 
in the lawmaking process by the 2 career prosecutors who serve as elected, 
part-time legislators.

Cannizzaro declined Tuesday to comment. Frierson didn't immediately respond 
Monday and Tuesday to messages about the court filing in one of three capital 
murder cases pending against Perez.

Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson also didn't respond to claims that 
as the employer of Cannizzaro and Frierson, he has "direct authority over the 
legislative leadership" and "indirect authority over his subordinates."

Perez's lawyers want the judge to order Wolfson to turn over copies of any 
emails, memos and telephone records between supervisory prosecutors and 
prosecutors serving in the Legislature.

They say they expect the records to show that Cannizzaro and Frierson were told 
to deny hearings and votes concerning capital punishment.

The 22-page court filing, dated April 25, asserts "the death penalty in Nevada 
is invalid because the legislative process ... has been compromised due to 
prosecutorial interference and dominance in Nevada's Legislature."

Assemblyman Ozzie Fumo and state Sen. James Ohrenschall, both Democrats, 
sponsored the bills that would have eliminated the death penalty. Fumo declined 
to comment about the lawsuit. Ohrenschall did not immediately respond to 
messages.

Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, has said he opposes the death penalty except in 
extreme circumstances. His spokeswoman, Helen Kalla, declined to comment about 
the new death penalty challenge.

Nevada lawmakers re-established capital punishment in the state in 1977 and 
directed that executions should be by lethal injection. Nevada currently has 77 
inmates on death row. The most recent execution was in 2006.

The state recently moved to the forefront of the death penalty debate when the 
lethal injection of a twice-convicted murderer who said he wanted to die was 
called off twice — in late 2017 due to challenges of a 3-drug combination never 
before used in the U.S., and in July 2018 after drug companies sued to block 
their products from being used.

The inmate at the center of those cases, Scott Raymond Dozier, later killed 
himself in prison.

Perez faces separate murder trials next year in slayings in August 2015. The 
court filing on his behalf raises multiple objections to the death penalty in 
Nevada, including the cost compared with life in prison, concerns about racial 
disparity, and an expansion since 1977 in the list of aggravating circumstances 
that allow prosecutors to ask juries to impose death.

Thomas is due to make arguments in the case on May 15 before Clark County 
District Court Judge Douglas Herndon.

(source: Associated Press)








CALIFORNIA:

1 Month Later, Strong Emotions About California's Execution Moratorium



1 month into California’s moratorium on executions, the historic action by 
Governor Gavin Newsom (pictured) is drawing high praise from exonerees, mixed 
reviews from victims’ families, and unusually personal condemnation from 
political adversaries. Kirk Bloodsworth — the 1st former death-row prisoner 
exonerated by DNA evidence — wrote that he was “thrilled” by the news of the 
moratorium. Bloodsworth, the interim executive director of the death-row 
exonerees’ organization, Witness to Innocence, said the moratorium would 
prevent the “unforgivable and grave mistake” of executing an innocent person. 
Beth Webb — whose sister and a close friend were killed and whose mother was 
wounded in the deadliest mass shooting in Orange County history — said she 
“could not be prouder to have Gov. Gavin Newsom standing with me and other 
loved ones of victims for whom the death penalty has created years of prolonged 
pain and suffering rather than any sense of justice.” At the same time, several 
California district attorneys staged a press conference with family members of 
other victims to denounce Newsom and the moratorium, and four prosecutors 
authored a CNN op-ed accusing the governor of ignoring victims and 
“singlehandedly undermining” California’s democratic government.

At an April 11 press conference in Sacramento the day after prosecutors 
announced they would seek the death penalty against Joseph DeAngelo — linked by 
DNA to at least 13 murders and 50 rapes in the 1970s and 1980s — Orange County 
District Attorney said “Governor Newsom took a knife and stabbed all the 
victims and all the victims’ families in the heart.” Ron Harrington — whose 
brother was murdered and sister-in-law was raped and murdered called the 
accused Golden State Killer “the worst of the worst of the worst ever. He is 
the poster child for the death penalty,” Harrington said. In their CNN op-ed, 
District Attorneys Anne Marie Schubert of Sacramento County, Michael Hestrin of 
Riverside County, Lisa Smittcamp of Fresno County, and Gilbert Otero of 
Imperial County derided the moratorium order as “a slap in the face to crime 
victims and their families” and an “autocratic decree [that was] a disgraceful 
day for democracy.”

In an op-ed in the Mercury News, Bloodsworth called the moratorium necessary to 
address California’s “long history of wrongful convictions.” He wrote that, 
“[s]ince 1989, 191 men and women have been exonerated of serious crimes in 
California. And since the death penalty was reinstated in the state, five men 
have been released from death row.” Those wrongful convictions, he said, had 
been caused by “witness misidentification, the use of junk science, false 
informant testimony, misconduct by police or prosecutors, and false 
confessions,” with multiple causes often present in each case. In an April 28, 
2019 op-ed in the Orange County Register, Webb described how years of 
deliberate misconduct by Orange County sheriffs and prosecutors forced local 
courts to bar the death penalty for convicted mass murderer Scott Dekraai. 
“From the beginning, it was clear the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and 
the District Attorney’s office were so focused on pursuing the death penalty 
that they were willing to cheat, withhold evidence and even lie on the stand” 
to stonewall the investigation of a multi-decade scandal involving the 
deliberate misuse of prison informants. “Because of the way some overzealous 
prosecutors pursue the death penalty at all costs, this case that should have 
been quickly concluded dragged on for six years, subjecting me, my family and 
the loved ones of the other victims to unimaginable pain,” Webb said. She also 
warned of “another, insidious, evil of the death penalty... [, that] it is 
wielded as a tool to score political points by an increasingly small group of 
prosecutors.”

Newsom’s moratorium order also drew support from six former governors who had 
granted clemency, imposed moratoria, or ended the death penalty in their 
states. In a blog post, Governors Richard Celeste, John Kitzhaber, Martin 
O’Malley, Bill Richardson, Pat Quinn and Toney Anaya wrote that Newsom’s action 
“took great courage, and the ability to see that his state’s death row … 
exemplified just how broken the system is.” The former governors praised Newsom 
for recognizing that “inaction isn’t an option” and assured Newsom that “he 
isn’t alone.”

(Kirk Bloodsworth, Opinion: My wrongful conviction shows need to abolish death 
penalty, The Mercury News, March 27, 2019; Beth Webb, I will spend my life 
fighting against the death penalty and I’m proud to have Newsom with me, The 
Orange County Register, April 28, 2019; Anne Marie Schubert, Michael Hestrin, 
Lisa Smittcamp, and Gilbert Otero, California Gov. Gavin Newsom's death penalty 
moratorium is a disgrace, CNN, April 23, 2019; Richard Celeste, John Kitzhaber, 
Martin O’Malley, Bill Richardson, Pat Quinn and Toney Anaya, 6 former governors 
tell CA Gov. Newsom “he isn’t alone”, Death Penalty Focus Blog, April 12, 2019; 
Andrew O’Reilly, Family members of murder victims slam California Gov. Newsom's 
moratorium on death penalty, Fox News, April 11, 2019.) See Victims, Innocence, 
and Prosecutorial Misconduct.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)








USA:

Finding Common Ground on Repealing the Death Penalty



What do Michael Bloomberg and Oliver North have in common? How about Michelle 
Malkin and Kim Kardashian West, or Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders? They may not 
share much turf when it comes to their political or social views, but they do 
all agree on 1 point that may surprise you.

They all oppose the death penalty.

Support for repealing the death penalty is diverse, it is growing, and it is 
bipartisan in nature. The brokenness of the death penalty system, long 
documented in local headlines and the cases they highlight, has hit a turning 
point with the public. This year alone, Republicans sponsored death 
penalty-repeal bills in ten states. That’s in keeping with trends that my 
organization, Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, has been 
tracking since 2012.

I am a walking example of this trend.

Growing up as a conservative and as the daughter of a Southern Baptist 
minister, my views on the death penalty were for many years exactly what one 
might expect—absolutely pro. But I changed my stance after finally digging 
deeper, and learning just how frequently innocent people are caught up in the 
system. I learned about the outrageous costs of the death penalty’s operation. 
I learned that the death penalty does not deter crime. I learned of the 
extraordinary arbitrariness and racial bias in sentencing.

These are the reasons that many on the political right, like myself, are 
joining the opposition to capital punishment and fighting for repeal.

At the end of the day, the death penalty is another failed big government 
program marked by the same inefficiency and misallocation of resources found 
throughout almost all bureaucracies. The tenets of conservatism are 
straightforward: a belief in limited government, fiscal responsibility, and the 
protection of the sanctity of human life. The death penalty does not meet any 
of those metrics, so it makes sense that conservatives are abandoning it in 
droves.

It’s been a rough few years politically in our country. The divisiveness and 
the disagreements have left many Americans feeling as though we’ll never come 
together again. I would argue that our ability to band together despite 
differences in ethnicity, religion, socioeconomic status, and culture is what 
has made American civil society so strong for so many years. On this point, the 
encouraging thing that I see in my work and in the movement against the death 
penalty at large is it is providing those of us eager to find new common ground 
with an opportunity to work across the aisle, on an issue we can all agree is 
unjust.

As state legislatures across this country debated repeal bills, I’ve sat 
shoulder to shoulder in hearings with people from all walks of life: Democrats, 
Republicans, Libertarians; murder victims’ family members and death row 
exonerees; Baptist, Jewish, Catholic, and Unitarian religious leaders; retired 
law enforcement, state attorneys general, judges, and lawyers. The list goes on 
and on. We have come together despite perceived and actual differences in 
stations, beliefs, and backgrounds to eliminate this broken system. There is 
power in that.

In addition to the growing number of repeal bills across the nation, there are 
some other signs of success that point to Americans’ growing disapproval. New 
death sentences are actually down 60 % since 2000, and last year was the 4th 
year in a row that the country carried out fewer than 30 executions. All 25 of 
those executions stemmed from just 8 states, and Texas alone was responsible 
for over 1/2 of them.

In short, not only is usage of the death penalty down, it is concentrated and 
isolated.

I often say that support for the death penalty runs a mile wide and an inch 
deep. The minute someone takes time to examine the facts around the death 
penalty support quickly wanes. My elevator pitch response to “what do you do?” 
is almost always real-time evidence of this fact. There are simply too many 
problems with the system for us to allow it to continue.

Given all the progress we have made in repealing the death penalty in recent 
years, and the diversity of support that made it happen, I think it makes 
perfect sense for Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty and the ACLU 
to work together as the U.S. marches closer to ridding the nation of this 
broken system forever.

When those opportunities arise and we find issues that unite us, I believe we 
must choose to come together. And when we come together as Americans, we know 
big things happen and we can fulfill the promise of justice in our justice 
system, one defined by equity, conscience, and our shared values as a society.

(source: Hannah Cox, National Manager, Conservatives Concerned About the Death 
Penalty, aclu.org)


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

Chase professor cited, quoted in national death penalty case



Drug dealer Azibo Aquart and his accomplices pulled on their masks and armed 
themselves early one morning on August 24, 2005, to break in a “perceived” drug 
competitor’s apartment. After constraining her and 2 others in the apartment, 
Aquart and company beat them to death with baseball bats, according to an 
edited version of the case.

Aquart was convicted of “murder in aid of racketeering and murder in connection 
with a continuing criminal drug enterprise and was sentenced to death,” 
according to the background of the case.

Although he was issued the death penalty at the federal level, Aquart is 
originally from Connecticut, a state that banned the death penalty.

That’s where Chase Law Professor Michael Mannheimer steps in. Mannheimer has 
done research for cases similar to this one.

Mannheimer said that as long as he can remember he has always wanted to be a 
lawyer. He likes to argue, reason things out and is good at math, which he said 
helps him think through things logically and systematically.

Mannheimer explained that the federal death penalty applies to every state, but 
he argues against this.

“It’s an interesting case because, at the time of the killings, Connecticut had 
the death penalty, but since then, Connecticut has repealed their death 
penalty,” Mannheimer said.

At the end of the oral argument, 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Guido 
Calabresi, according to Ballotpedia.org, asked that the parties submit briefs 
on “original understanding” of the Eighth Amendment and how it applies to 
United States v. Aquart, Mannheimer said.

The Eighth Amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor 
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

It’s the last part of the Eighth Amendment that serves as an argument made by 
the defense.

“You can’t apply the federal death penalty for a crime that occurred in a 
non-death penalty issue,” Mannheimer said agreeing with an argument made by the 
defense.

The defense cited Mannheimer’s work, citing one of his articles to make this 
argument.

Mannheimer has written several articles on this topic; he summarized his 
viewpoint as to supercede how the Eighth Amendment framers and ratifiers used 
the words “unusual punishments.”

“What they meant by the word unusual was ‘not permitted by law’, and what a lot 
of them were thinking of, I think, was ‘not permitted by the law of the 
state’,” Mannheimer said.

Mannheimer explained that state law was used to protect individual rights and 
in order to ensure that the federal government supersede these state laws, the 
Bill of Rights was created as a compromise.

“The best test for what is unusual is, ‘Is it authorized by law?’” Mannheimer 
said.

Calabresi, however, said, “I concur in the result, namely, that nothing in the 
constitutional arguments that are before us precludes a new penalty 
proceeding,” according to an edited version of the case.

In addition to his research and being cited 10 times, Mannheimer also teaches 
several course ranging from criminal law, evidence and the death penalty.

John DeRossett, Chase Law student, explained that every professor’s teaching 
style is different. However, he likes Mannheimer’s teaching style better than 
other professors he’s had before.

“He is hard, but I respect him. He is very detail oriented when it comes to 
cases,” said 2nd year Chase student, Dayna Wilson. “He’s helpful for that, he’s 
helpful for the research, because he’s so knowledgeable.”

(source: thenortherner.com)