Month: March 2012

NAACP President Visits Connecticut To Campaign Against Death Penalty

march, 29 2012  source : http://www.courant.com

video “news” : click here 

HARTFORD — The leader of the NAACP came to the state Capitol Thursday to press for repeal of Connecticut’s death penalty.

NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said Connecticut is a key state in the association’s strategy to eliminate capital punishment nationwide.

Sixteen states have repealed capital punishment, most recently New Jersey, New Mexico and Illinois.

“We have 10 more states before we can go to the Supreme Court,” Jealous told reporters at an afternoon press conference just outside Gov.Dannel P. Malloy’s office.

To end the practice, the court would have to determine that the death penalty is not just cruel but also unusual, Jealous said. And one measure of “unusual” is that the majority of states have outlawed it, he said.

Jealous acknowledged that the campaign to end capital punishment likely would not meet a great deal of success in the legislatures of Georgia, Texas and South Carolina. Instead, the group is focusing its efforts on states that it believes would be more amenable to scrapping the death penalty, such as Maryland, California and Connecticut, where lawmakers passed a repeal bill in 2009 only to have it vetoed by Gov.M. Jodi Rell.

On Thursday, Jealous stood alongside Rell’s replacement, Malloy, who has said he would sign a bill that replaces the death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of release. Such a bill cleared the legislature’s judiciary committee earlier this month, but its fate remains uncertain because at least three key state senators have indicated they are conflicted about it.

If approved, the ban would apply to future cases; capital punishment would be preserved for the 11 men currently on death row in Connecticut. The state executed only one man in the past 50 years.

During his visit to Hartford, his fifth in recent years, Jealous met with Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, a supporter of the repeal bill.

“We are on a mission at the NAACP to finish the work of Thurgood Marshall and W.E.B. Du Bois,” Jealous said.

Malloy, a former prosecutor, said that he used to be somewhat ambivalent on the death penalty but that working in the criminal justice system convinced him that capital punishment is wrong.

“I think everybody in the state of Connecticut knows what my position is,” Malloy said. “Ben didn’t have to travel all this way to convince me … but I was certainly happy to have a discussion about this item.”

Malloy said he is available to talk to those legislators still struggling with the issue. But he also suggested that the death penalty is a matter of conscience, not public opinion polls, for individual lawmakers.

“If [we] had taken a poll on civil rights in the United States in 1962, we’d still have Jim Crowe laws,” Malloy said.

Sen. John Kissel, an Enfield Republican and one of the strongest defenders of preserving the state’s death penalty, said he, too, votes his conscience. But, he added, “I still believe it’s important [tool] in our criminal justice system.”

Oregon – High court again overturns death sentence – Robert Paul Langley Jr.

The Oregon Supreme Court, for the third time in two decades, has overturned a death sentence against Robert Paul Langley Jr. for a murder committed in 1987.

The decision announced Thursday sent the case back to Marion County Circuit Court for further proceedings. District Attorney Walt Beglau has not announced whether he will seek the death penalty for Langley.

Because four of the sitting justices have worked for the Oregon Department of Justice, which represents the state in death-penalty cases, they did not take part in Thursday’s decision. The three remaining justices were joined by a retired justice and a Court of Appeals judge to decide the case.

In essence, the justices decided that Langley was erroneously compelled to represent himself in court when he was sentenced to death again on Nov. 9, 2005.

Death sentences are automatically reviewed by the high court.

Langley, who now is 52, originally was tried in connection with two separate murders.

The body of Anne Gray, 39, was found buried in the backyard of Langley’s aunt in April 1988. Gray’s death dated back to Dec. 10, 1987.

On April 14, 1988, Larry Rockenbrant, 24, was killed and his body found buried in a cactus garden at Oregon State Hospital, where Langley lived while he took part in a program for mentally and emotionally disturbed prison inmates. Langley’s therapist consented to the cactus garden as a way to allow Langley to relax.

Langley was convicted of aggravated murder in separate trials in 1989 and sentenced to death.

The Supreme Court reversed the death sentences in 1992. It ruled that in Gray’s case, the jury was not allowed to hear mitigating evidence, and in Rockenbrant’s case, evidence from Gray’s murder was improperly admitted in the trial.

Langley was sentenced to death for a second time in a retrial for Gray’s murder. But in the Rockenbrant case, he was sentenced to life in prison with a 30-year minimum.

Upon appeal in 2000, the Supreme Court again reversed his death sentence, ruling that the jury failed to consider an option of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

After the case went through three circuit judges — Joseph Guimond, Terry Leggert and Joseph Ochoa, all now retired — Langley was sentenced to death for a third time in Marion County in 2005.

Langley had reshuffled his lawyers several times.

But the sentence came down only after Langley was required to represent himself in the proceeding without the court obtaining a valid waiver of his right to counsel. That self-representation occurred after Ochoa ruled that Langley’s other option was to accept representation by someone who Langley had complaints about — but Ochoa assumed those complaints were frivolous.

“That, too, was not a permissible choice,” said the court’s opinion, written by Justice Robert Durham.

“The record indicates that the court decided that defendant’s (Langley’s) refusal to make the offered choice entitled the court to make the choice itself in favor of compelled self-representation, rather than representation by counsel,” Durham wrote.

“That was (an) error. In our view, because submission of the choice to defendant was itself impermissible, defendant’s refusal to make the proposed choice was entirely proper. It follows that the trial court erred in requiring defendant to proceed to trial on the sentencing phase of a capital murder case without the assistance of legal counsel.”

Oregon Supreme Court   read the opinion ( media release) : click here 

Prison system appears to have bought $50,000 in execution drug last year

march 29, 2012  source :http://www.statesman.com

A year ago, facing a possible shortage of key drugs needed to keep the nation’s busiest execution chamber in business, Texas prison officials appear to have purchased tens of thousands of dollars worth of the lethal drugs, new disclosures by state officials reveal.

While no detail is provided, records obtained by the American-Statesman hint that Texas could have enough of the drugs on hand to cover its executions for more than a year and perhaps the largest stockpile in the country — at a time when other states are scrambling to find suppliers for the same drugs.

The disclosure came this week, when the Texas Department of Criminal Justice filed paperwork seeking to keep secret all details of five purchases last May and June of “medical supplies” from Physician Sales & Service Inc.

Asked by the Statesman to make public details about those purchases made with taxpayer dollars, as the agency routinely does with other items it buys, prison officials appealed to Attorney General Greg Abbott to keep the information from public view.

“The requested copies of vouchers, invoices, purchase orders and other purchasing documents will reveal the identities of suppliers of the agency’s lethal injection drugs,” Patricia Fleming, an assistant general counsel for the prison system, wrote in a letter Tuesday to Abbott.

Although Fleming’s letter seems to state that the purchases were lethal drugs, a spokesman for the prison agency disputed that.

“We’ve not identified what the medical supplies are listed on the invoices,” prison spokesman Jason Clark said.

In seeking to keep the information secret, Fleming wrote that disclosure would allow death penalty opponents and others “to intimidate, harass and threaten the suppliers, forcing them to shut down production or blacklist correctional departments.”

She also accused an “abolitionist coalition” including death penalty opponents, human-rights organizations, criminal defense attorneys and the media of engaging in a campaign to cut off the supply of execution drugs.

At least twice recently, drugmakers facing pressure from death penalty opponents stopped selling one of the three drugs used in lethal injections in the United States — or stopped making it altogether, the letter says.

According to public state purchasing records, the prison agency on May 4 paid for $22,928.76 worth of “medical supplies” from Physician Sales & Service.

The following day, the agency paid for three additional purchases totaling $24,839 from the same firm — for 39 vials of the execution drug Nembutal, according to a copy of the invoice for that purchase. The American-Statesman obtained a copy of that invoice from a complaint filed last year by attorneys for two death row inmates who asked the Texas Department of Public Safety to investigate the purchase.

On June 1, the agency paid for another $1,910.73 in “medical supplies” from the company, according to the records, which list no detail.

The nearly $50,000 in purchases are a tiny fraction of the agency’s $3 billion budget and comparable to the $19,000 a year it costs taxpayers to incarcerate a prisoner. And while the price of execution drugs has increased 15-fold over the past year, death penalty supporters and crime victims groups say the cost is well worth it to ensure public safety.

The purchases could presumably include other commonly used medical items such as syringes, gloves, saline solution and other items used in executions — although such items are unlikely to cost tens of thousands of dollars. Furthermore, the agency did not disclose redacted versions of the invoices — as most agencies, including the prison system, usually do in responding to public records requests when they want to keep some details secret.

State records reviewed by the American-Statesman show the purchases during 2011 were the only ones the agency has made in recent years from Physician Sales & Service, at a Houston address.

The company, headquartered in Jacksonville, Fla., did not return calls for comment. On its website, it bills itself as “the country’s largest supplier of medical products to physician practices.”

The prison system buys its execution drugs directly, not through its separate medical providers as other states have done, documents previously made public have shown.

Regardless of how much stock the agency has on hand, Clark said “the agency has no plans to sell drugs to other states” — as some other states have done.

full article click here 

TEXAS – Hank Skinner – one more innocent on the death row

Filmmaker Werner Herzog’s segment on Hank Skinner, who is on Texas death row and fighting to prove his innocence with more DNA testing.

official website : http://www.hankskinner.org/

Arkansas – Death-row inmate claims state withheld evidence

march 29, source :http://arkansasnews.com

LITTLE ROCK — A man sentenced to die for a 1997 double homicide in Little River County did not receive a fair trial because prosecutors withheld crucial evidence from the defense, an attorney for the man argued today before the state Supreme Court.

An attorney for the state said the outcome of the case would have been the same even if the state had provided the evidence.

The court heard oral arguments but did not immediately issue a ruling in an appeal by Timothy Lamont Howard, 42, who was convicted of two counts of capital murder in the deaths of Brian and Shanon Day. The three were friends and were all involved in using and selling illegal drugs, mainly methamphetamine, according to court filings.

Brian Day’s body was found in a U-Haul trailer in Ogden on Dec. 13, 1997, and his wife’s body was found in the closet of the couple’s home in Ashdown later the same day.

At Howard’s trial in December 1999, jurors heard a forensics expert testify that boots found 2 1/2 miles from the murder scene contained hairs that were a likely match with Howard, and that blood on the boots was a likely match with Brian Day.

Howard’s trial lawyer argued that Howard was in Texarkana when the murders occurred and that the boots had been used to frame Howard.

The state Supreme Court upheld Howard’s conviction in 2002, but federal public defender Scott Braden argued before the high court today that it should order a new trial, or in the alternative send the case back to Little River County Circuit Court for a new evidentiary hearing, because the defense has learned that the state withheld evidence that could have changed the outcome of the trial.

That evidence includes notes showing that errors occurred during the testing of DNA from the boots and that samples may have been contaminated. Braden said the state had those notes but did not provide them to the defense before the trial.

“There is no question here that there is a reasonable probability that the jury would have done something different” if the defense had been able to use those notes to try to impeach the DNA evidence, Braden argued.

Assistant Attorney General Lauren Heil argued that other evidence established that the boots were Howard’s, including testimony by Howard’s ex-wife that the boots looked like his.

Justice Robert Brown asked Heil if she thought that testimony was equivalent to testimony of a DNA match. She said she believed it was, in combination with Howard’s defense that the boots were used to frame him — a defense that she said required conceding that the boots were his.

Braden also argued that the state did not provide the defense with a police report detailing an incident of abuse that Howard suffered as a child. He said the defense could have used the report as evidence of Howard’s violent childhood during the penalty phase of the trial, and the jury could have considered Howard’s past a mitigating factor that weighed against imposing the death penalty.

Heil argued that Howard could have brought up the incident himself at his trial, but he did not.

“The defendant has an obligation to raise things within his own unique knowledge,” she said.

Heil also argued that the defense did not assert its claims in a timely manner, a charge that Braden denied.

The Supreme Court split on Howard’s previous appeal in 2002, ruling 4-3 to uphold his conviction. Only two of the justices who took part in that decision are still on the court: Chief Justice Jim Hannah and Justice Robert Brown, both of whom said then in dissenting opinions they would have overturned the conviction because of problems with the state’s case.

Justice Donald Corbin recused from hearing both appeals. Filling in for him today as a special appointed justice was Little Rock lawyer Ronald Hope.

Name Date Duration
NEW!! CR 00-803 Timothy Lamont Howard v. State of Arkansas, from Little River Circuit Mar 29, 2012 00h 53m Oral Argument

Case Caption:
TIMOTHY LAMONT HOWARD
V
STATE OF ARKANSAS

Timothy Lamont Howard (ACTIVE) Appellant’s counsel:
Dorcy Kyle Corbin – LEAD
Janice Wegener Vaughn – LEAD
Mac John Carder Jr – LEAD
Julie Brain – LEAD
Scott W. Braden – LEAD
Joshua R. Lee – LEAD
Conviction Information:
Convicted of: Capital Murder
Sentence: 000-00-000 (yyy-mm-ddd)
Sentence Type DEATH

State Of Arkansas (ACTIVE) Appellee’s counsel:
Attorney General – LEAD

Trial Court: Little River
Little River Circuit
Trial Court Number: CR-97-105
Trial Judge: Charles A. Yeargan

——- EVENT LISTING ——–
03/29/2012 Case Submitted – Orally Argued

03/29/2012 Supreme Court Votesheet Issued

03/29/2012 Supreme Court Oral Argument Issued for
REGULAR DOCKET scheduled for 03/29/12 at A.M. – ORAL Argument.
2/27/12 – Scott Braden and Josh Lee confirmed
2/27/12 – Lauren Heil confirmed

No. 02-6564 Status: DECIDED
Title: Timothy Lamont Howard, Petitioner
v.
Arkansas
Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Arkansas
September 26, 2002 (CR00-803)
~~Date~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sep 25 2002 Petition for writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 26, 2002)
Oct 28 2002 Brief of respondent Arkansas in opposition filed.
Nov 7 2002 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 27, 2002
Dec 2 2002 Petition DENIED.
********************************************************
~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Jeffrey M. Rosenzweig 300 Spring Street 5013725247
Suite 310
Little Rock, AR 72201
Party name: Timothy L. Howard
Attorneys for Respondent:
Lauren E. Heil AG’s Ofc., 200 Tower Building 5016821309
323 Center Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Party name: Arkansas

Why is Alabama opposing DNA testing?

March 28, 2012  source :http://socialistworker.org

why is Alabama opposing DNA testing?

Rebekah Skelton reports on a case where an Alabama man’s life is at stake.

March 28, 2012

Alabama death row prisoner Thomas ArthurAlabama death row prisoner Thomas Arthur

THOMAS ARTHUR has been on Alabama’s death row for 30 years. He was convicted of killing Troy Wicker in 1982, but has always maintained his innocence. Recently, a federal appeals court stayed Arthur’s March 29 execution date over an issue about lethal injection, though that stay could be lifted at any time.

The real question, however, remains this: Will Thomas Arthur be executed in Alabama without being allowed to have DNA testing that could prove his innocence?

There is a piece of evidence, an “Afro wig” worn by Wicker’s killer as a disguise, that could be tested for Arthur’s DNA. The wig has already been tested once for DNA, after another Alabama prisoner, Bobby Ray Gilbert, confessed to Wicker’s murder in 2008. However, the testing was inconclusive–there wasn’t a match for Gilbert or Arthur.

Ultimately, the original judge decided that Gilbert’s confession wasn’t credible, and despite a lack of other physical evidence tying Arthur to the crime, she recommended that the Alabama Supreme Court deny Arthur’s appeal, which it did.

Now, Arthur’s defense team is asking for a more advanced DNA test, called a mini-STR DNA analysis, on the wig, but Alabama’s attorney general is fighting the request–arguing that this test wouldn’t be any more accurate than the previous one. On top of that, there is no law guaranteeing Arthur the right to further DNA testing.

“I am outraged that there is physical evidence that, if DNA-tested, would prove my father’s guilt or innocence conclusively. This testing could be done prior to his execution and would be paid for by the law firm handling his case,” said Arthur’s daughter Sherrie Stone. “If we are to continue executions in this country, laws must be put in place in which DNA testing must be allowed at all stages of the process. There is a chance we are executing innocent people. I know because my father is one of those people.”

If the lawyers have offered to pay for the testing, what could possibly be the problem? If the test shows that Arthur’s innocent, the state of Alabama can rest easy knowing they didn’t condemn an innocent man to death. And if it show’s he’s guilty, it would only affirm what the state has already convicted him of, at no cost to them.

However, as Andrew Cohen pointed out in a February article in The Atlantic, the general consensus among prosecutors and judges is to value “finality” in cases, rather than “accuracy.” Sharon Keller, the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, outlined this position in a 2000 “Frontline” interview, saying, “We can’t give new trials to everyone who establishes, after conviction, that they might be innocent. We would have no finality in the criminal justice system, and finality is important.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

IT SHOULD be clear to anyone with a conscience that if there’s even a small chance that someone might be innocent after being convicted, the court should do everything in its power to ensure they have the right person–especially when someone’s life is at stake.

But lately, prosecutors have been fighting harder than ever to keep defendants from having access to post-conviction DNA testing. Hank Skinner has been on Texas death row since 1995. His case has many similarities to Arthur’s, such as DNA evidence the court is denying him the right to have tested and a heavy emphasis on an eyewitness who at one point or another recanted.

“Since these guys are on their electoral deadlines, their finality has nothing to do with accuracy,” said Skinner’s wife Sandrine Ageorges-Skinner. “You can’t rush justice.”

The goal of any justice system has to be to find the truth. As Sandrine said, since no justice system is ever going to be infallible–there have been 289 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the U.S., according to the Innocence Project–prosecutors and judges must be willing to admit that they might have convicted the wrong person.

Post-conviction DNA testing must be granted to prisoners whose guilt is questionable–o matter what the cost, and especially when it could be an innocent person who’s paying the ultimate price.

First published at The New Abolitionist.

1 month

that’s already been a month Claim your innocence is online, and over 3000 views, 143 posts, thank you all for your interest, thank you to those who follow my blog, I am very grateful. take care.

Plea-bargain decision underscores right to justice

march 29, source :http://www2.journalnow.com

For those fortunate few who’ve never been exposed to the criminal justice system, it might seem odd to learn that more than 90 percent of all criminal convictions in federal and state courts are the result of plea agreements with prosecutors.

Because of the crushing volume of cases, the courts would not work without the use of “plea bargains” that avoid the necessity of time-consuming trials.

Now come two rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court that underscore what should be obvious: Defendants have a constitutional right to effective counsel by their attorneys when considering plea negotiations, the Journal’s Michael Hewlett reported. The rulings are expected to change the way pleas bargains are handled, which may mean more work for defense attorneys but perhaps a better system of justice overall.

The revelation of so many wrongful convictions in recent years makes the idea that defendants have a right to a clear understanding of any plea offer a no-brainer — and long overdue. Criminal defense lawyers should be expected to do a thorough job briefing their clients when prosecutors offer plea bargains.

“This could affect every defendant in the system,” Ron Wright, a professor at Wake Forest University School of Law, told the Journal. It won’t bring the system to a halt, he said, but defense attorneys likely will have to file more paperwork and take more time to ensure their clients get the right legal advice regarding plea offers. That’s a worthy goal.

In one of the cases the high court ruled on, Anthony Cooper rejected a plea offer because his attorney told him that prosecutors could not prove the crime. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison instead of the seven years he could have received under the plea.

Cooper’s attorney “had no business practicing criminal law if he didn’t know better than that,” Pete Clary, Forsyth County’s public defender, told the Journal. Clary said defense attorneys have an ethical obligation to present all plea offers to their clients and advise them accordingly.

Forsyth County District Attorney Jim O’Neill said plea offers are written down and placed in the public court file, and the defendant is informed of the plea offer in open court.

If that is accompanied by a defense attorney’s consultation with his client on the pros and cons of the offer, then the defendant has been treated fairly and equitably by our system of justice. That should be a given

Thomas Douglas Arthur new execution date has been set for today at 6pm (Stay)

march 29, 2012 source : http://www.myfoxal.com

A new execution date has been set for death row inmate Thomas Douglas Arthur.

Officials with the Alabama Department of Corrections say Arthur will be put to death on Thursday, March 29th at 6 pm. That will happen at Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore.

Arthur has served more than 24 years on Alabama’s death row. He was convicted in the contract killing of businessman Troy Wicker in 1982.

Thomas  Douglas had challenged his scheduled execution by lethal injection, claiming the state’s use of a new anesthesia did not completely sedate inmates before the lethal drugs were administered. He said the practice was cruel and unusual.

The court on Wednesday declined a request by Alabama’s attorney general’s office to reconsider a March 21 decision allowing Arthur to go forward with his challenge.

Spokeswoman Joy Patterson said the Alabama attorney general’s office was not going to appeal the court decision Wednesday.

State attorneys have pointed to successful executions where the drug — pentobarbital — was used.

The court last week decided to put Arthur’s execution on hold while the challenge was heard. It marked the fifth time that Arthur — who has maintained his innocence for more than 29 years while on death row — was spared execution.

According to court documents filed by the State of Alabama, Troy Wicker’s wife, Judy, testified that she had a sexual relationship with Arthur and paid him $10,000 to kill her husband.

11th court read the docket click here

Thomas Douglas Arthur  Website

case and old post  click here