death row

TEXAS – Bobby Lee Hines – Execution – june 6 2012 – DELAYED

Bobby Lee Hines Photo: TDCJ / HC

HOUSTON — A Texas death row inmate facing execution in three weeks for the slaying of a Dallas woman at her apartment more than 20 years ago has lost an appeal at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The justices, without comment, refused Monday to review the case of 39-year-old Bobby Lee Hines.

Hines is set for lethal injection June 6 for the 1991 murder of 26-year-old Michelle Wendy Haupt. She was found stabbed repeatedly with an ice pick and strangled.

Hines was 19 at the time of the slaying and was on probation for a burglary conviction. He was staying with the apartment complex maintenance man who lived next door to the victim and had access to all the keys in the development.

—————————————————-

Update may 21, 2012  source : http://www.chron.com

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (AP) — The execution of a man early next month for the slaying of a Dallas woman at her apartment more than 20 years ago has been delayed.

Dallas County prosecutors asked a judge to withdraw the June 6 execution date for 39-year-old Bobby Lee Hines because results of additional DNA testing in his case won’t be available by then. District Court Judge Don Adams in Dallas approved the request Friday.

Hines was convicted of the 1991 murder of 26-year-oldMichelle Wendy Haupt. She was stabbed with an ice pick and strangled.

Hines was 19 at the time and on probation for a burglary conviction. He was staying with the apartment complex maintenance man who lived next door to the victim and had access to all the keys in the development.

Docket Entries

on May 14, 2012

Petition DENIED. (orders list)

on April 18, 2012

Reply of petitioner Bobby Lee Hines filed. (Distributed)

on April 12, 2012

Brief of respondent Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division in opposition filed.

on March 12, 2012

Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 13, 2012)

Parties

Bobby Lee Hines, Petitioner, represented byLydia M.V. Brandt

Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent, represented by Tomee M. Heining

………………………………………………………….

Facts of the  crime ( from Texas Attorney General)

On October 19, 1991, Mary Ann Linch went to the apartment of her friend Michelle Wendy Haupt in Carrollton, Texas, to spend the weekend. Linch brought with her a Marlboro cigarette carton in which only four packs remained. She had purchased the cigarettes at Brookshires’ in Corsicana and the carton contained a stamp showing “Brookshires’ Store” on the side. Linch left the carton at Haupt’s apartment when they left that evening to go to a nightclub. Linch had intended to return to Haupt’s, but instead spent the night with another friend.

Linch testified that when they went to the club, Haupt was wearing a gold sand-dollar charm necklace which she always wore. During the evening, Haupt became ill and another friend drove her back to her apartment. When he left, he testified that Haupt locked the door behind him.

Meanwhile, at Haupt’s apartment complex, Hines appeared uninvited at a party. When the hostess asked him who he was, he identified himself as the brother of the apartment manager. He told another guest that he was part of the maintenance crew at the complex. He pulled out a ring of keys and stated that he could get into any apartment that he wanted to at any time.

At about 6 a.m. on October 20, 1991, Haupt’s next-door neighbor heard a woman screaming. He could not determine the source of the screams, but his wife called the police. Two police officers were dispatched to the scene, but the screaming had ended before they arrived. After inspecting the premises, the officers could not determine where the screams had come from and they eventually left.

Two other residents in the apartment directly below Haupt’s also heard screaming loud enough to awaken them. One of the residents testified that he also heard other loud noises that sounded “like a bowling ball being dropped on Haupt’s floor.” He heard this noise at least 20 times. The screaming lasted for approximately 15 minutes.

The resident of an adjacent downstairs apartment also heard the screaming. Just before noon that morning, she and the other residents discussed what they had heard and became concerned for Haupt. Eventually, the apartment leasing manager was persuaded to check Haupt’s apartment. After knocking and receiving no answer, the manager opened the door and saw Haupt lying on the floor just inside the door. A stereo cord was tightly wrapped around her neck, her face was black, and she appeared to be dead.

Haupt was found dressed in only a robe and lying face up on the floor. There were puncture wounds to her chest area. The robe was stained with blood, but it had no holes to correspond with the puncture wounds to Haupt’s body, indicating the robe was placed on her body after the wounds were inflicted. Further, the belt to the robe was tied tighter than a person would normally tie it against her own body.

An object appearing to be an ice pick was found on the nearby couch. Hines’ palmprint was found inside Haupt’s apartment in what appeared to be blood, and his thumbprint was found on the inside of the front door. 

Later that same day, Hines was found to be in possession of Haupt’s gold sand-dollar charm. He had blood on some of his clothing and some other objects from Haupt’s apartment, including the Brookshires’ cigarette carton, were found under the couch where he had been sleeping. When Hines was arrested, he had a scratch under his right eye, scratches to the left side of his neck, and a scratch on his cheek. DNA testing conducted on a bloodstain found on Hines’ underwear indicated that the blood was consistent with Haupt’s blood. 

The Dallas County Chief Medical Examiner testified that the cause of Haupt’s death was strangulation and puncture wounds. Haupt had abrasions to her neck and jaw, contusions on her neck, and a fractured hyoid bone. She had about 18 puncture wounds. She had rectal tears with hemorrhaging. Barnard testified that the puncture wounds could have been made by the object found on the couch in Haupt’s apartment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On October 21, 1991, Hines was indicted on charges of capital murder for intentionally and knowingly causing the death of Michelle Wendy Haupt by strangulation and stabbing, during the course of committing burglary of Haupt’s habitation, on October 20, 1991. Hines was convicted and sentenced to death on March 19, 1992. Hines’ motion for a new trial was denied on April 6, 1992. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Hines’ conviction and sentence on direct appeal on May 10, 1995. Hines’ petition for writ of habeas corpus in the state court was denied on February 24, 1999.

His federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in the federal court was denied on January 22, 2002. The district court also denied Hines a certificate of appealability (COA) on March 5, 2002. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals likewise denied COA on December 31, 2002, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied Hines’ petition for writ of certiorari on October 6, 2003.

PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY

Hines was arrested for car theft in 1984 at the age of twelve for which he received a year of juvenile probation. His probation was revoked and he was confined for three months in the Texas Youth Commission (TYC).

In 1986 he received ten-years of juvenile probation for burglary of a building, which was revoked in 1990. He was then confined in TYC for nine months.

In February 1986, Hines was placed on juvenile probation for getting into a school fight, and was committed to TYC for assault; He was confined 6 months and placed on probation, which he violated in 1987. His probation was revoked and he was confined for 6 months in TYC.

In January 1989, Hines was committed to TYC for attacking an elderly lady and burglarizing a church.

In June 1990, Hines received a 10-year prison sentence for a count each of burglary of a habitation and burglary of a building. Hines was placed on shock probation for 83 days, then released on 10-years probation.

 ………………………………………………………

2003 

June 22, 2003

No one deserves to die!

My name is Bobby Lee Hines, I am on Texas death row, I have been here for almost 12 years now and I first came here at the age of 19 years old. I am now into the last stage of my appeals.

I would like to take the time to say a few words, if you are willing to listen.

I often wonder if the people in the free world really understand that there’s two types of society? You have the free world society and the prison society.

When I was sentenced to death, it was because a jury was randomly picked out from the free world society and then given the power to make such a life and death decision! These people on the jury had no degree’s in psychology.  None that I remember were even a doctor of any kind!

The jury deciding I was or could be a threat to society is why I was sentenced to death, NOT because I was found guilty of a crime. There are two special issue questions the jury had to answer in the punishment phase that clearly show that! Here they are just as they were when given to the jury in my trail.

Special issue 1:  Do you find from the evidence that there is a “probability” beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant Bobby Lee Hines would commit criminal acts of violence that constitute a continuing threat to society? jury answered YES

Special issue 2:  Taking into consideration all of the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant’s character and background, and the personal moral culpability of the defendant, is there a sufficient mitigating circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment rather than a death sentence be imposed? jury answered NO

Would you for a moment reread this again and notice that the state is asking the jury to take a “guess” at the answers, because again they have “no” type of degrees  and just thought (guessed) that I might be a threat to society. Now in special issue 2, last sentence asking, if life imprisonment should be imposed, nowhere do they explain that there are two types of society. They weren’t given a way to make a clear decision but only a way to make only a guess!The jury had even asked the judge how much time would I have to do in prison on a life sentence if given one! And the judge said: “you don’t have to worry about that, that is no concern to you all!”

Now how could any jury be able to make such a drastic decision when they were denied information that they had asked for? This should have been the biggest part in deciding if one should live or die! Not only that, but the state allowed witnesses to lie in my trail on the stand in front of the jury. In short, I was charged with aggravated robbery at age 14, I had a trail and was acquitted-(not found guilty)of that charge. In my capital trail, then age 19, witness got up on the stand and stated that I was convicted of that aggravated robbery charge at age 14.  Me being only 19 years old at the time of my trail, I didn’t know anything about the law.  Ask yourself, “how much do you really know about the laws of the court system?” Even more so when you’re just looking back to a younger age of 19.  My lawyers didn’t object, and my appeal lawyers said that due to that , I waved my issue on appeal for it! This was no fault of my own, but the fault of the trail lawyers. The point here is, if the jury would have known that I was not guilty of that aggravated robbery charge at age 14, they may have or could have had a different opinion in the matter of deciding whether I was not a threat to society, or at least the prison society, and may have given me a life sentence rather than a death sentence.

I truly am not a threat to either the free world-or the prison society.

After all appeals are up, there is only one way to receive a life sentence. This is through what they call a clemency hearing. There has only been one clemency given since 1976 until now June 22, 2003.  In this time there has been some 315 executions, about 265 of them have been executed since I’ve been on death row.

The people deciding whether to recommend clemency to the governor don’t look at the facts that they should be looking at. If they would look and see that the trial court in my case used just 8 years of my past for the jury to decide that I would or could be a threat to society.  If they would look at my prison record over the past 11 years that I have been locked up on death row, they would clearly see that I’m not a threat to any society. Plus if they would take an over all count of cases that are in the “prison society” that have life sentences or 40,50 to 60 year sentences or more, looking into their prison records etc….then look at mine, they again would see that I would not in any way pose any type of threat to a prison society, and that I could in fact live in the prison society with a life sentence!

To prove my point to the fact, I spent some 8 plus years on a death row work program. Now the program was closed down due to an escape. Note that I had nothing to do with it.  But 8 plus years I lived being able to move around freely everyday, all day! Sixty (60) death row inmates on one wing with the cell doors opening up everyday, every hour on the hour, with only one “unarmed guard” working inside the wing, never feeling threatened,  and no one ever hurt guards.  I worked with and around 12 inch scissors, all types of shears and many different types of tools, working, living and functioning just as any other inmate would in any prison society. Again, I’m no threat to any society. I can and would live in the prison society with a life sentence if given the chance.

No one deserves to be strapped down to that gurney  to die!

I want to thank you for taking the time to listen to me and what I’ve written. Any help or just input that you may have, please feel free to write to me at the address listed below! I’ll write more again soon!

Sincerely
Bobby Lee Hines

TEXAS – Death Sentence Reviews Leave Unsettled Issues

may 13, 2012 source :http://www.texastribune.org

Stanley Schneider was shocked last year when Texas’ highest criminal court sent his death row client an early Christmas gift of sorts, ordering the trial court to re-examine evidence from a psychologist who had decided thatJohn Reyes Matamoros was mentally fit to face execution.

“We were hopeful their sending it back would mean something,” Schneider said.

But his hope flagged in March when, he said, two Harris County state district judges virtually rubber-stamped Dr. George Denkowski’s findings in the cases of Matamoros and a fellow death row inmate,Steven Butler. Denkowski, the psychologist who testified in the cases of 14 current Texas death row inmates that the convicted men were mentally fit for execution, was reprimanded last year after other psychologists and defense lawyers filed a complaint alleging that he had used discredited evaluation methods.

Lawyers for Matamoros and Butler, who have filed objections with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, say any findings by Denkowski should be disregarded. They said that the trial court judges — who are husband and wife — simply adopted Denkowski’s conclusions instead of examining reams of evidence from other psychologists that they said proved their clients were mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty.

“This is a perfect example of the state taking science and trying to prostitute it,” Schneider said, adding, “The role of the courts is to protect us from junk science.”

 

Judge Marc Brown, of Harris County District Court, who reviewed the Matamoros case, was in trial and did not respond to a request for comment. His wife, Judge Susan Brown, declined to comment on the Butler case because it is continuing. Calls to Denkowski were not returned.

But Roe Wilson, Harris County assistant district attorney, contended that the judges had disregarded Denkowski’s findings.

The judge’s findings in Butler’s case repeatedly refer to Denkowski’s findings, but Wilson said the references were “historical.”

“There was no consideration given and no mention given,” Wilson said.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in 2002 that states could not execute people who were mentally retarded. The court allowed states to decide on guidelines for determining whether a person was mentally retarded. Texas courts have adopted a three-part definition that requires the convicted inmate to have below-average intellectual function, to lack adaptive behavior skills and to have had these problems since an early age.

Denkowski conducted tests to determine whether defendants who might face the death penalty aligned with those definitions.

But other psychologists and defense lawyers complained that he artificially inflated intelligence scores to make defendants eligible for the death penalty. (Denkowski’s lawyer has said that he vigorously denies having violated any psychology board rules and that he used his best clinical judgment in making forensic evaluations.)

Last year, the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists agreed to a settlement with Denkowski in which it reprimanded him, but he did not admit guilt. He agreed not to conduct intellectual disability evaluations in future criminal cases and to pay a fine of $5,500. In return, the board dismissed the complaints.

 

Since that reprimand, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has asked trial courts to review at least six cases that included Denkowski’s work to determine what effect it had had on the case.

Defense lawyers argue that Denkowski’s conclusions should be completely excluded from those reviews.

“You can talk all day long about how you don’t want junk science used in these cases, but when you’re confronted with it, you have to take active steps to make sure it hasn’t contaminated the case,” said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which represents death row inmates.

The Butler and Matamoros cases are the first to be returned to the Court of Appeals.

Butler, who was also sentenced to life in prison for a separate conviction of aggravated sexual assault with a weapon, was sentenced to death in 1988 for the shooting death of Velma Clemons, a clerk at a dry-cleaning business.

Denkowski evaluated Butler, and he testified in the case in 2006. School records showed Butler had been classified as “educable but mentally retarded,” but Denkowski said nothing in the records indicated that he required special education. He noted that Butler could tell time and could recite his Social Security number, “highly atypical skills for a mentally retarded person.” He concluded that Butler’s I.Q. was borderline normal.

Similarly, Judge Susan Brown concluded that Butler’s poor academic performance reflected underachievement and poor choices, not lack of intellectual function. She also wrote that he had enough intellectual ability to plan, commit and then lie about the murder for which he was convicted.

Dick Burr, a defense lawyer, said the judge had ignored findings by experts hired by Butler’s lawyers, including Dr. Denis Keyes, a special education professor at the College of Charleston, and Dr. Jack Fletcher, a psychology professor at the University of Houston. Both found that Butler had a low I.Q. and was mentally retarded.  Fletcher — one of the psychologists who complained to the board about Denkowski’s work — said that Denkowski’s conclusion that Butler was mentally fit for execution “was based on outmoded, no-longer-accepted information.”

“Our evidence demonstrated very persuasively that Steven Butler has mental retardation,” Burr said.

Matamoros, whose criminal history included auto theft and burglary with intent to sexually assault, was convicted of the 1990 murder of 70-year-old Eddie Goebel, who was found in his bed with 25 stab wounds.

Denkowski concluded in 2006 that Matamoros was not mentally retarded. His low I.Q. scores and a psychologist’s finding in 1977 that at 14 Matamoros had a mild intellectual disability, Denkowski concluded, were a result of bilingualism and his rearing in a deprived environment.

Judge Marc Brown agreed, quoting from a federal court ruling in the case that in turn relied on Denkowski’s findings. Like Denkowski, the judge concluded that Matamoros’s ability to care for himself as an inmate and to plan and commit crimes also contradicted his claims of mental retardation.

Judge Brown’s findings discounted the evaluations of psychologists hired by Matamoros’s lawyers who found that he was mentally retarded.

Dr. Thomas Oakland, a psychologist and a professor at the University of Florida, reviewed Denkowski’s findings along with Judge Marc Brown’s ruling. Both, he said, showed a “reckless disregard” for established forensic psychology.

“Based upon my review of Denkowski’s affidavit and testimony, it is my opinion that Matamoros’s intelligence was and is significantly subaverage,” he wrote in an affidavit.

Wilson, the assistant district attorney in Harris County, disputed the inmates’ lawyers’ argument that the judges’ findings were largely copied from Denkowski’s work.

“I don’t think that is an accurate characterization, but that is something the Court of Criminal Appeals will determine,” she said.

Lawyers for Butler and Matamoros want the Court of Criminal Appeals to insist that the death row inmates’ claims be re-evaluated without any reliance on Denkowski’s work.

Schneider said the decision by the Court of Appeals in the two cases would also send a signal to other judges who are reviewing cases in which Denkowski had made evaluations. He said he hoped the court would continue to reject forensic methods that had been proven unscientific.

“Their role has to be that of the supergatekeeper of forensic science,” Schneider said. “They have to say we will not allow a proceeding tainted by junk science to go forward.”

USA – Amnesty International – Know the Facts About Capital Punishment

Last Update February 2012 

Capital punishment does not work. There is a wealth of mounting evidence that proves this fact.

The death penalty, both in the U.S. and around the world, is discriminatory and is used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. Since humans are fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.

Furthermore, the astronomical costs associated with putting a person on death row – including criminal investigations, lengthy trials and appeals – are leading many states to re-evaluate and re-consider having this flawed and unjust system on the books.

Learn more about death penalty statistics and key arguments:

click on the differents categories for read the pdf file from Amnesty International

 

“Witness to Homicide” is a haunting report of the execution of Michael Selsor by the only journalist to ever interview him.

May 10, 2012 Source : http://www.aljazeera.com

In 2010, while making an episode of Fault Lines on the death penalty in the US, Josh Rushing interviewed death row inmate Michael Selsor. It was the only interview Selsor ever granted.

Two years later, Rushing returned to watch Selsor die.

In this special report, he takes an unflinching look at an American execution.

Read the full article and Selsor’s interview : click here 

FLORIDA – Death row inmate’s fate now up to Judge Berger- James Daniel Turner

May 10, 2012 Source : http://staugustine.com

A death row inmate convicted in a brutal stabbing death in a motel room in 2005 now must do what probably is familiar to him: wait.

James Daniel Turner was in court Wednesday for the second day of an evidentiary hearing in which his attorneys asked for a new trial. They said Turner’s former attorneys didn’t make the jury aware of significant mental health illnesses he had when Renee Boling Howard, 37, a mother of five, was stabbed to death at a Comfort Inn.

The hearing concluded before noon, and now Circuit Judge Wendy Berger will think over the matter before making a decision.

No date has been set for a decision.

On Tuesday, an expert witness for the defense said Turner suffers from bipolar and borderline personality disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and that the jury was not made aware of those diagnoses.

On Wednesday, an expert witness for the state said he does not believe Turner suffers from bipolar or borderline personality disorders.

Dr. Jeffrey Danziger, a Maitland-based psychiatrist and medical doctor, said the symptoms that led to those diagnoses were induced by Turner’s dependence on powdered methamphetamine, cocaine and alcohol and did not appear in the seven years he was in prison.

Danziger said Turner “does not suffer from bipolar disorder because he hasn’t had a manic episode that I am aware of.”

He said accounts of manic activities such as Turner’s spending of a $25,000 settlement in one week and unstable romantic relationships, including three failed marriages, could be attributed to the effects of the substances.

Rather, “he has some situational unhappiness, and that’s to be expected” because he is in prison and sentenced to death, Danziger said.

He said Turner had not exhibited borderline behavior while in prison, such as cutting himself, banging his head against a wall or attempting suicide.

And the ADHD?

“Maybe,” Danziger said. But even if he does suffer from that disorder, “it has little to do with (the murder) in 2005.”

Danziger agreed with several previous diagnoses that found that Turner has frontal lobe damage.

He said those findings were “not surprising for someone who has a history of heavy substance abuse and maybe suffered some knocks to the head,” including head trauma in substance-induced car accidents.

A jury in 2007 found Turner, then of Silverstreet, S.C., guilty of stabbing Howard on Sept. 30, 2005, at the St. Augustine motel off State Road 207 and Interstate 95 after escaping from a South Carolina prison and stealing a police car.

Prosecutors said he stabbed Howard several times before turning to see her crawling toward the door and stabbing her again.

Two of Howard’s children, a 10-month-old and a 2-year-old, were in the room, as was her 10-month-old grandchild. They weren’t injured, but Howard’s friend Stacia Raybon was attacked twice before locking herself in the bathroom.

If Berger grants a new trial, it would be the third for Turner.

Berger declared a mistrial during Turner’s first trial in July 2007 when a juror had a seizure during consideration of the fifth and final charge against the defendant.

Jurors found him guilty Nov. 29, 2007, during his retrial and later recommended the death penalty.

Dr. Miguel Mandoki, a Jacksonville psychiatrist, said during the first trial that he believed Turner was insane when Howard was killed in St. Augustine.

In addition to the death sentence, Berger sentenced Turner to life in prison for home invasion robbery with a deadly weapon, five years for the grand theft of Howard’s Ford F-150 pickup truck and 15 years for aggravated assault on a police officer.

St. Johns County Deputy Graham Harris had testified that he chased Turner south on State Road 207 at speeds between 90 and 100 mph. He said Turner put the pickup truck in reverse and rammed his patrol car before jumping off the Deep Creek bridge.

NEVADA – Nevada court reviews death penalty sentence of convicted killer

May 7, 2012 Source : http://www.lasvegassun.com

A convicted killer does not have to show by a preponderance of the evidence that he does not deserve a death sentence, a defense lawyer says.

John R. Petty of the Washoe County public defender’s office told the Nevada Supreme Court that it should nullify the death penalty given murderer James Biela because a wrong instruction was given to the jury during the penalty phase of the trial in Reno.

But Terry McCarthy of the Washoe County district attorney’s office said each juror makes his or her own decision. And the death penalty should be upheld.

But Justice Kristina Pickering said there could be confusion in the jury instruction.

On Jan. 20, 2008, 19-year-old Brianna Dennison disappeared while sleeping on the couch of the home of a friend in Reno. Her body was found Feb. 15 in a field. She had been raped and strangled with a pair of thong panties.

Petty, the chief appeal deputy in the public defender’s office, said the jury was wrongly instructed that the mitigating circumstances must outweigh the aggravating circumstances to eliminate the possibility of the death penalty.

But Justice Michael Douglas noted the defense at the trial never objected to the jury instruction. Nor did the defense attorney argue against it in his closing argument.

But Petty said the court should either grant a new penalty hearing or reduce the death sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Deputy District Attorney McCarthy told the court there was no requirement at trial that the death penalty be imposed. He said it was a moral judgment by the juror.

In his brief to the court, McCarthy quoted the instruction as saying, “If you find unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one aggravating circumstance exists and each of you determines beyond a reasonable doubt that any mitigating circumstance do not outweigh the aggravating, the defendant is eligible for a death sentence.”

The court took the arguments under submission.

Biela is one of 82 men on death row in the state prison in Ely.

There has not been an execution by lethal injection in Nevada since Daryl Mack was put to death on April 26, 2006.

ARIZONA – Death-row inmate’s case before AZ clemency board

May 7, 2012 Source : http://www.myfoxphoenix.com

PHOENIX (AP) – Arizona’s largely new clemency board on Monday is expected to consider the case of a death-row inmate set for execution next week.

But the attorney for Samuel Villegas Lopez has asked the five-member board, which has three new members, to delay the execution and a decision in the matter.

Attorney Kelley Henry argues that the new board members should have additional training before considering Lopez’s request for mercy.

Gov. Jan Brewer overhauled the board last month, replacing two voting members and longtime Chairman Duane Belcher with three new people in what some defense attorneys and anti-death penalty advocates said was a political move.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection next Wednesday at the state prison in Florence in what would be the fourth execution in Arizona this year.

Related articles

TEXAS – For immediate release – Thomas Whitaker

DEATH ROW INMATES SUE TEXAS GOVERNOR RICK PERRY AND SENATOR JOHN WHITMIRE FOR ABUSIVE CONDITIONS
Livingston, Texas, USA ‐ April 26, 2012
Thomas Whitaker, an inmate on Texas death row, has filed a class action lawsuit against Texas Governor Rick Perry, Senator John Whitmire, and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
for the inhumane and unconstitutional conditions under which the men on death row must live.
Allegations include taking away wheelchairs from those who cannot walk, denying mental and physical health care, being held in solitary confinement for over ten years without any legal justification based on their conduct, dangerously unsafe living conditions, inadequate nutrition, inadequate exercise, denial of adequate access to telephones, destruction and loss of necessary legal documents, denial of religious freedom, denial of fair administrative process, failure to timely deliver mail including legal correspondence, and other abuses. 
 
In the case of Ruiz v. Estelle, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District held that conditions for the Texas prison system were unconstitutional but also held that the inmates of death row would need to bring a separate lawsuit to address their unique situation. That is the action now being taken by Whitaker. There have been acts of retaliation by TDCJ toward men who have been a part of this suit or similar litigation.
Thomas Whitaker, No. 999522, age 32, from Fort Bend County, Tx, Residing on Texas Death Row since March 2007, convicted under the Law of Parties. Visit his blog: “Minutes Before Six”.
Contact Information
Robert B. Wells,
Co‐Director
Descending Eagles
512/478‐4973
Fax: 512/302‐4774
P.O. Box 49339, Austin, Tx 78765
3724 Jefferson, Ste. 309, Austin, Tx 78731
The following acts and omissions of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice have caused irreparable harm to all residents of death row at the Polunsky Unit in Livingston, Texas. These acts and omissions continue to harm the residents of death row at the Polunsky Unit. All residents now housed at Polunsky, previously housed at Ellis, on death row were put in solitary confinement in administrative segregation improperly and in violation of the existing plan for incarceration of those persons on male death row. Although most of the residents had not been charged with or found guilty of any conduct that would be punishable by solitary confinement, they have been retained in solitary for over ten years (since 2000). No less than a full due process hearing is required to determine whether there is a valid reason for the continued confinement in solitary. No such hearings have been held. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice regulations require a hearing with attendance by the Plaintiff, the warden, and the Classification Committee of the unit to determine if administrative segregation is appropriate or to extend such conditions beyond a limited period. There have been no such hearings. Those so held do not meet the Texas Department of Criminal Justice [TDCJ] requirements for such confinement because there has been no determination that each individual is in need of segregation for his protection or safety; there is no violation of the regulations of TDCJ for which a hearing is pending, there is no reason to assume that all are “custody risks” when they have shown no signs of being such. The fact that another person attempted escape does not make this entire class any more of a custody risk than the average person incarcerated in the general population.
By both action and inaction basic human needs of adequate food, safe shelter, adequate exercise, medical care and living conditions conducive to mental health are being denied every resident of death row. There are frequent failures to provide sufficient nutrition for the residents of death row in their daily food provision. Housing conditions include unsanitary living conditions due to inadequate cleaning of the cells and shower areas. At times, no cleaning product other than water is used by those performing general cleaning. Residents are not given access to cleaning products to maintain their cells in a sanitary condition and to kill black mold. Although security might dictate precluding caustic chemicals in the area housing those who might be a security risk, there is no reason to deny them ordinary cleaning products to keep their living area safe from disease causing bacteria. The food trays are often placed on the floors where there is sewage or spittle. The showers have inadequate ventilation causing it to be so humid and hot that residents have been made ill. The attorney visitation booths are not adequately ventilated for the residents. When an unruly resident is being gassed for misconduct, the other are exposed to so much of the caustic and harmful fumes as to also suffer from the contact. There is inadequate exercise. One hour a week is inadequate for the maintenance of physical health. There is no reason access to the outdoors and vigorous physical activity daily should be denied. The cells have inadequate ventilation and they effectively shut off the residents from all contact with the outside world. The occupants of the cells are subjected to harsh temperatures. The ceilings of some cells leak and there is black mold growing in some cells. Lights are controlled by officers who turn them off and on at their discretion exposing those trying to sleep to light that awakens them and prevents adequate rest. Food is served at hours not usually considered appropriate for meals with no justification for such a schedule. Clothing also is delivered at hours designed to interrupt sleep. Other than the brief periods they are allowed out to shower and one time a week they are allowed recreation, they are in solitary confinement twenty‐four hours a day, seven days a week. The prolonged period of sensory deprivation has resulted in serious mental health conditions. No effort has been made to examine the residents of these isolation cells to see how they have been damaged by these conditions.
There has been a frequent lack of care used in regard to legal documents. When their cells are searched for contraband, their legal documents are often tossed in with other property and subsequently lost or damaged.
In violation of the regulations of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, “legal visits” between offenders in order to obtain needed assistance in their legal cases have been curtailed. Adequate postage is denied which prevents corresponding with legal counsel when necessary. Mail sent to or received from legal representatives has been opened and read.
Access to law books is very limited and difficult as well as access to information that could be gained from having greater access to the library and to television. Telephone access so as to be able to contact their legal representatives is not permitted. Residents of death row are denied adequate telephone access to contact legal counsel. At times, the transport of the resident is so slow that they are denied access to legal counsel. Counsel often is forced to wait for up to an hour or completely denied a legal visit. 
 
Residents of death row have been denied reasonable treatment for diagnosed medical conditions. Medical staff exhibits indifference or is unavailable. Dental care is extremely inadequate as is care of vision. Those in need of wheelchairs are now being denied access to a wheelchair and required to walk using a walker out of an excessive reaction to one person having been a security risk because he was being transported in a wheelchair when a weapon was found in the wheelchair. There is a concerted effort to avoid identifying the mentally handicapped for fear it will lead to them getting their sentences reduced to life rather than execution. Further, the mentally ill are not housed separately as is required by the regulations. Those nearby are kept awake by the shouts of those who are psychologically disturbed. There is inadequate treatment of the mental health issues that incarceration in these conditions necessitates. There is totally inadequate screening to determine whether mental health issues have arisen. There is inappropriate supervision of the mentally ill in terms of their maintenance on the prescribed treatment. The seriously mentally ill are not transferred to more suitable facilities nor is staff trained to deal with them properly. Prescribed medications and “over the counter” medications are not provided promptly or consistently so as to allow maintenance of the health of all residents, both mentally and physically in need of regular treatment. Both the mentally and physically ill have had the water turned off in their cells to prevent them from urinating due to dehydration. They have been denied food so as to not have fecal matter if the mentally ill individuals throw feces at guards. The physically ill had hemorrhoids and was bleeding excessively. At such time as each such sick individual became unable to move, they were finally given some degree of treatment at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas. Contrary to the ethical standards required, no physician or guard or warden reported these crimes of abuse. The elderly, diabetic or mentally ill have been abused because they could not move quickly or fell due to their fragile condition. The very severely mentally ill are incapable of completing their administrative appeals due to their condition. Everyone suffers emotional trauma from witnessing these episodes of abuse of weak and fragile individuals. The mentally challenged or mentally ill are subject to punishment for their failure to understand the regulations they must follow. Their non‐compliance due to confusion leads to longer and longer confinement in segregation without clothes, mattress, linens, and inadequate food and medication. Guards are poorly trained in mental health so as to recognize whether there is real misconduct or a lack of comprehension. Those who are delusional are harassed and tormented by some guards. These guards are not disciplined or terminated, but are allowed to continue to abuse the mentally ill. Those who are mentally ill are incompetent to personally bring any grievance or complaint on their own behalf. Assistive devices such as braces, medical issue boots, and wheelchairs have been confiscated and not provided to those requiring them for proper function of their extremities or movement from location to location. Adequate pain medication is routinely withheld.
All residents are denied activities that would be conducive to good mental health such as an opportunity to engage in creative work or crafts which are allowed those in the general population of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and only denied to residents of death row, including those who have nearly perfect conduct records. They are further denied access to television. These activities were allowed until recently. Some men escaped from Ellis, as a consequence of their conduct ‐ not the conduct of the current residents of death row at Polunsky, all previous activities that actually provided the residents with an incentive to improve their conduct so as to be able to engage in such activities, have been curtailed. It should be noted that the residents of death row purchase the materials with which to do crafts from the commissary operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice which provides money for the operation of the prison system. The men then were able to sell their work and spend the money paid for the completed craft project at the commissary, which actually recirculates the money again into the income of TDCJ. There is no security reason for denial of this activity. Furthermore, when a resident attempts to design his own craft activity, it is destroyed because using shoe strings or thread or plastic lids to make a craft is deemed using the item for a purpose other than the one originally intended. This is cruel and an absurd abuse of authority.
The residents of death row are thwarted in their attempts to pursue their administrative appeals as these appeals are mislaid either accidentally or intentionally or by there being a denial of the right to pursue their administrative appeal to conclusion due to action designed to delay or circumvent the administrative process.
Access to religious literature and other religious objects is denied in an indiscriminate manner. Those on death row are also denied the right to attend a religious service. No religious service is available for them to attend. Some are denied access to a representative of their faith as a spiritual adviser. In regard to adequacy of food, food that is Halal or Kosher is being exposed to pork grease.
The mail room is one of the worst situations for those men on death row. Entire publications are being withheld because the newspaper or magazine contains one article that the particular person screening the mail found unacceptable without applying the written standard as set out in Department regulations. Correspondence is very, very frequently mishandled. There is an ongoing retaliatory process to prevent some residents from sending or receiving their mail or to delay receipt of their mail unnecessarily. The amount of postage actually physically permitted each individual has been unduly and unreasonably curtailed.Access to postage at all has also been unreasonably curtailed. Legal mail has been opened before being delivered and has been  read. Outgoing legal mail has been read. There is no justification for denial of access to television. Television was available until death row was moved to the Polunsky Unit. Charitable groups have offered to donate televisions, there is an empty rack for holding a television in the day room, but no television. There is no valid security reason for denying access to the educational and recreational benefits of television. No other residents of penal institutions in Texas are denied televisions. This, on occasion, denies access to information that would be beneficial in regard to their legal defense.
The opportunity to work in a job in the Department of Criminal Justice is now suspended. That suspension needs to be ended. Other men found guilty of murder who are in the general population are permitted to work. This would be a very strong incentive for the men to maintain good conduct. Many, if not most, men on death row would be eager to have an opportunity to perform work. This would reduce the cost of maintaining their pod. They would willingly clean their pod themselves. They would maintain their own living area better than it is now cleaned.
Giving any person who is incarcerated incentives for good conduct is going to result in fewer disciplinary problems. Treating people fairly and with decent concern for their health and safety and emotional needs will result in a group that is easier to discipline. Those who do not respect the opportunity, then deserve to have opportunities denied.
Source: Minutes Before Six, April 26, 2012
Related articles

SOUTH CAROLINA – Rate of death sentences, executions slows in state

may 7, 2012 source : http://www.greenvilleonline.com

COLUMBIA — A judge in Lexington County is considering doing something that hasn’t been done in South Carolina in over 14 months — send a convicted murderer to death row.

If Kenneth Lynch is sentenced to death for killing a 7-year-old girl and her 53-year-old grandmother, he would be the 52nd inmate on South Carolina’s death row, boosting the population up from its nearly two decade-low.

The pace of executions has slowed considerably too. South Carolina has executed just one inmate in past three years. There were 72 people awaiting execution in the state at the end of June 2005, and just 10 executions in the state since then. Prosecutors in South Carolina sent no one to death row in 2011, the first time that happened since at least 1994.

It’s not that South Carolina has lost its willingness to put people to death. More than a dozen death penalty bills were filed during this session of the General Assembly, many of them seeking to add crimes to the list of aggravating factors prosecutors must prove to get a death sentence. The state also changed the way it conducts lethal injections because of a shortage of one of the drugs it had been using.

As states like Connecticut outlaw capital punishment, and neighbor North Carolina discusses whether it is applied fairly, South Carolina seems content with its laws as written.

Instead, prosecutors worry that complex death penalty trials are too expensive in all but the most extreme cases. South Carolina abolished parole for life sentences in 1995, making “life means life” an attractive option for juries and prosecutors who can use the chance of the death penalty to leverage a guilty plea.

There may be no better way to illustrate how seeking the death penalty has changed in South Carolina in the past two decades than the case of Shaquan Duley, who is serving 35 years in prison after pleading guilty in March to suffocating her 2-year-old and 18-month-old sons, putting them into a car and rolling them into a Orangeburg County river to try to make it look like an accidental drowning

read full article : click here 

Related articles

TEXAS – DEATH ROW PRISONER SUES GOV. PERRY OVER INTOLERABLE LIVING CONDITIONS

may 5 , 2012 by Execution Watch

LIVINGSTON, Texas — A prisoner on death row has filed a class-action lawsuit against Gov. Rick Perry and other officials for inhumane and unconstitutional living conditions, the nonprofit group Descending Eagles announced Friday.

Among the abuses alleged in the suit are:
— taking away wheelchairs from those who cannot walk,
— denying mental and physical health care,
— being held in solitary confinement for over ten years without any legal justification based on their conduct,
— dangerously unsafe living conditions, including inadequate nutrition and exercise,
— denial of adequate access to telephones,
— destruction and loss of necessary legal documents,
— denial of religious freedom
— denial of fair administrative process,
— failure to timely deliver mail including legal correspondence

The suit, which also names state Sen. John Whitmire and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, identifies as the plaintiff death row prisoner Thomas Whitaker of Fort Bend County.

Descending Eagles, the Austin-based nonprofit that helps death row prisoners and their families, said there have been acts of retaliation by TDCJ toward men who have been a part of the suit or similar litigation.