Oct. 5 ARIZONA: Jury spares murderer's life in retrial Keith Phillips was sentenced to death for a murder during a holdup in Tucson in 1998. But 4 years later, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision in another Arizona murder case that changed the way death sentences are meted out across the country. The high court in Ring vs. Arizona took the decision away from the judge and put it in the hands of a jury. Phillips' case, along with 29 others, was sent back to the Arizona Supreme Court to determine whether a jury might have seen things differently. In Phillips' case, it did. On Sept. 24, after a 6-week trial focused only on sentencing, not on guilt or innocence, a Pima County jury spared Phillips' life. Under Arizona law, a judge will now decide whether Phillips deserves the possibility of parole after 25 years. The Phillips case is the 1st of the "Ring 30" to go back to trial. Prosecutors and defense attorneys agree that it's too early to tell whether juries in the remaining cases will be as lenient. The number of death sentences being imposed by Arizona juries suggests not. But in the short run, the new system is straining an already overburdened court system. "The increase in the number of cases we have is stretching our resources," said Presiding Criminal Judge Eddward Ballinger. So is the amount of time it takes to reach a sentence. Consider an ongoing murder trial that began July 27. The jury reached a guilty verdict Aug. 31 and already has spent almost 5 more weeks hearing testimony to determine if the defendant should be put to death. These long trials not only make it harder to find jurors able to spend that much time away from their jobs, but as Ballinger puts it, it takes judges "out of pocket" as well. The "Ring 30" retrials pose still more questions. They will challenge prosecutors worried about the fading memories of eyewitnesses to 10-year-old crimes. "As a case gets older, it gets harder and harder to prove," said Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Paul McMurdie. "If we have DNA evidence, it's DNA evidence in 5 years. But if you're going to be basing it on eyewitness testimony, talking to the witnesses and saying what happened, it's harder to recall and it's easier to make it look like it's not that good as evidence." Defense attorneys and mitigation specialists worry about whether the jurors will believe the testimony of expert witnesses or dismiss it as paid-for by one side or the other. And the trials will open old wounds for victims' families. Beth Hendrickson's daughter was murdered in 2001. The killer was convicted in 2002 but had not yet been sentenced when the Supreme Court decision came down. Nonetheless, the case had to go back to trial with a new jury, which sentenced him to death row. "It was really hard to sit through all of it again," said Hendrickson, of Phoenix. Hendrickson's wounds were still fresh, and her daughter's killer had not yet been sentenced. The 30 cases under Arizona Supreme Court review already had been sentenced once. The victims' families have waited even longer for justice to be revisited, and they face the possibility of a different outcome. Hendrickson can identify with them. "Just when you think you can put all the judicial process behind you and actually start working on your grief, it's all brought back up again," Hendrickson said. "You have to face him in the court room again." Cases in legal limbo The Ring decision arose from an Arizona case. Timothy Stuart Ring was sentenced to death in Maricopa County Superior Court in 1995. Under the court rules at that time, the jury found him guilty and then, at a later date, the prosecutors and defense attorneys presented the aggravating and mitigating factors of the case to the judge, who then passed sentence: death. Ring's case went through the usual automatic appeals process, stopping first at the Arizona Supreme Court, which affirmed the conviction, and on to the U.S. Supreme Court. Ring was represented before the high court by Andrew Hurwitz, who has since become a state Supreme Court justice; the state's case was argued by then-Attorney General Janet Napolitano. Hurwitz won. The court ruled that Arizona's sentencing method was unconstitutional because it violated Ring's right to a jury trial as granted by the Sixth Amendment. A jury had to determine aggravating factors such as if the victim was a child, if the murder was committed for money or if it was so cruel as to warrant the death penalty. In Arizona, 30 cases were caught in legal limbo, with defendants who were sentenced to death before Ring but had not yet gone through the automatic appeals process. All were sent back to the Arizona Supreme Court to see if there was a possibility that a jury might not have returned a death sentence. (A later U.S. Supreme Court decision in yet another Arizona murder case determined that cases further into the appeals process did not have to be revisited.) Hurwitz recused himself from the reviews. Some convictions were thrown out. Some cases were put on hold for reasons other than those spelled out in Ring. And 16 cases were sent back to Superior Court with guilty verdicts intact, but for new juries to ponder new sentences. Phillips was the 1st to go back to trial. Long process Several more of the Ring 30 cases were scheduled to go back to trial in front of new juries this fall - Ring himself is scheduled for January - but McMurdie said that most likely will be continued as the attorneys try to build their cases. In "almost every single case the defense has asked for additional time to find more mitigation," McMurdie said. '"We won't know exactly how much trial time it'll take to reopen these cases until we actually try them." Defense attorneys applaud the Ring decision for considering mitigating factors. "The state Supreme Court has recognized that mitigation is important and by sending these cases back, the juries will be taking a look at this evidence and deciding whether it was mitigating," said Dale Baich, a federal public defender specializing in capital cases. Regardless, Arizona juries have had no qualms about sending murderers to death row so far. Since Ring, they have imposed 16 death sentences in 23 capital cases. But the new process is time-consuming. Though some people in the court system refer to the upcoming re-sentencings as "mini" trials, they aren't necessarily short. The Phillips trial lasted more than six weeks. Attorneys ponder what material they can leave out of the re-sentencing trials, Ballingersaid. "A lot of the prosecutors say, 'I need to retry the whole thing,'" Ballinger said. And McMurdie noted that the Maricopa County Attorney's Office is filing fewer capital cases because of the resources they demand: 24 cases in 2003 compared with 32 and 34 in the 2 years prior. Under the old rules, the mitigating evidence was prepared after conviction. It was presented only to the judge, who could read the briefs and make his decisions accordingly. But under the new rules, that same evidence must be presented to the jury in open court. "It's a big difference presenting to a jury instead of just to the judge and trying to consider the dynamics of the jury instead of only having to speak to one person where you pretty much know what his educational background is," said Pam Davis, a mitigation specialist for the Maricopa County Public Defender's Office. Before, lawyers had years to prepare mitigation. Now it needs to be prepared before the case goes to trial, because it would be impossible to retain a jury forever. A murder case now in progress in Maricopa County Superior Court took five weeks to reach a guilty verdict. The sentencing phase of the trial has already taken 4 weeks and may take a week or two more. By the time it ends, the jury will have spent at least 10 weeks in trial. "It's kind of intriguing to me how you find a jury pool with the length of time involved with jury sentencing in capital cases," said Kent Cattani of the Arizona Attorney General's Office. 'Re-victimizing families' There will be a cost to the families of the victims and the defendants. Davis said that many of the defendants' families are guarded, reluctant to get their hopes up for loved ones they've already given up for dead. And Jamie Mabery, who handles victims' rights for the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, said that family members of victims also may have mixed feelings about going back to trial. "We're re-victimizing the families," she said. "If it's an old issue that they have put to rest in their heart, it's really hard to relive that again." Hope Kajiwada's niece and nephew were killed in 1999. The victims' mother died of cancer 12 days later and Kajiwada became the primary advocate for the dead. "When I went through this the first time, I knew every second of every day, everything they did because I was very much involved with them. I lived it and breathed it because that's all I had left when they died," she said. Then it was over and she tried to forget about it. "You work very hard to put that in the back of your mind," she said. "You can't live forever with that being your every waking thought, which is what it was for a long time. It's hard to know you're going to go in there this time and not have that reassurance that everything they ask you, you know it. That's very scary." (source: Associated Press) OHIO----impending execution Death row murderer blames his victim----He shouldn't have moved, says Akron man set to die Oct. 13 for shotgun slaying Mansfield, Ohio - In the upside-down world of Adremy Dennis, Kurt Kyle "ended up dead" because he moved when Dennis warned him not to. Dennis (whose 1st name is pronounced Ad-REM-ey) believes he is simply one good lawyer away from walking the streets a free man. Absent that miracle, the 28-year-old Akron man will be executed Oct. 13 for the June 5, 1994, shotgun slaying of Kyle, an amateur race car driver from Akron. In a death row interview Monday at the Mansfield Correctional Institution, Dennis said he believes that an incompetent jury and inept lawyers are the reason he is about to become the youngest inmate in 42 years to be executed in Ohio. He also believes that Kyle bears part of the responsibility for his own murder. Dennis shot Kyle, 29, after he and a co-defendant, Leroy Anderson, held up Kyle and a friend in front of Kyle's house as Kyle was celebrating a victory at the Barberton Speedway. Dennis was 18 when he shot Kyle. Anderson, who was 17, was sentenced to 40 years to life. "At that time, I was young and dumb," the 6-foot-6, 200-pound inmate said. "I was drunk. I told this man, 'Don't move.' I ain't saying it's all his fault, but why did he move? "Every day, I think about that. It ain't, 'Why did you kill that man?' It's, 'Why did you move?' I think about that every day - sometimes 1,000 times a day." Kyle's mother, Doreen, was angered, but not surprised, to learn that Dennis still does not accept full responsibility for shooting her son. "It's absolutely ridiculous," she said. "I never addressed him at his trial because he just sat there, slumped, and acted like, 'Why am I here, what did I do, who do they think they are?'" By a 5-3 vote, the Ohio Parole Board recommended Sept. 21 that Gov. Bob Taft deny Dennis' request that his sentence be commuted to life without parole. The majority cited Dennis' "lack of sincere remorse." If the governor is waiting for an 11th-hour expression of contrition from Dennis, he isn't likely to hear one. Asked what he would say to Taft, Dennis said, "It ain't going to be about I'm sorry. It's going to be about I ain't had no legal representation. They hung me, from trial all the way through my appeals. I ain't been on death row 10 years yet. There's guys been here 20 years, and they're going to kill me? Something's wrong. . . . I ain't supposed to be here." Dennis believes he should have been charged with involuntary manslaughter, not aggravated murder. "I should be in prison for what I've done, but with a possible out date," he said. "Not for life. Accidents happen, you know what I mean? . . . You have to learn to forgive. People are going to make mistakes. This ain't heaven, and we ain't Jesus." He is insistent that his legal case is so "twisted" that one good lawyer could untangle the Gordian knot and set him free. "I could be something great, man," he said. "I could have anything I want. I know that. . . . I want mansions and yachts and private planes and things like that." Told that he sounds like he's living in a fantasy world, Dennis smiled and said, "I keep my mind positive. I might not get those mansions and yachts I'm talking about, but if - there's always if. "Until I'm in the graveyard, there's always if or maybe, and that's how I plan on living." (source: Plain Dealer) INDIANA: Defense asks court to waive death penalty for Taylor Style Taylors mother allegedly put alcohol in his baby bottle, blew marijuana smoke in his face and routinely beat him with whatever object was nearby while he was an infant. This is the main reason why this abused child grew up to be a killer, according to his defense attorneys. Taylor's attorneys, John Martin and David Vandercoy, asked the jury to spare their client's life during the death penalty phase of his trial Monday. Taylor, 24, and Keon Thomas, 29, were convicted last month of the March 20, 2000, robbery/murder at Firearms Unlimited at 935 Chicago Ave., Hammond. The pair were found guilty of fatally shooting the shops owner Frank Freund, 73. Rashida Boskic, Taylors cousin, testified Monday that she saw his mother, Kitty, regularly beat him as a child. "She'd just hit him like he was a little rag doll," she recalled on the stand. Boskic said Taylors mother verbally abused him, smoked crack cocaine and prostituted herself. When shown a picture of Taylor as a young boy, Boskic broke down on the stand. The picture revealed a bruise under his eye. "No child deserves to get beaten like that," Boskic said through tears. Linda Dixon, Boskic's mother and friend of Taylor's mother, admitted to regularly doing drugs with Taylors mother and witnessing the alleged abuse. She claims Kitty gave the infant child alcohol and blew marijuana smoke in his face to "calm him down." Dixon said she quit drugs and lives in Tennessee now. Dixon became combative with Assistant U.S. Attorney Philip Benson during cross examination. During a round of grueling questioning, Dixon sarcastically referred to Benson as "baby." "I'm not your baby," Benson angrily shot back. U.S. District Judge Charles Norgle told Dixon to answer the prosecutor's questions properly. Dixon admitted on cross examination she never notified authorities of the alleged abuse. Testimony in the penalty phase is expected to continue today. (source: Gary Post-Tribune) UTAH: Judge to decide if death-row inmate can expand his appeal A federal judge is mulling whether a Utah death-row inmate can raise issues in his appeal concerning jury instructions in his trial - issues he has already been barred from raising in state court. U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell heard arguments Monday in the case of Ronnie Lee Gardner, 43, who in 1985 shot and killed attorney Michael Burdell during a courthouse escape attempt that prompted installation of metal detectors in Utah courthouses. Gardner had claimed on appeal that he should get a new trial because his previous appellate attorneys did not challenge erroneous jury instructions given in his trial. The Utah Supreme Court earlier this year rejected his claim, saying Gardner was procedurally barred from raising the issue in state court because it was not raised in his initial appeal. Campbell is deciding whether Gardner is procedurally barred from raising the issue in federal court as well. Gardner attempted to escape when he was transported to the now-demolished courthouse at 250 E. 400 South in Salt Lake City for a hearing on his conviction for the 1984 slaying of a bartender. His girlfriend got him a gun, and Gardner shot Burdell in the face. The appeal is Gardner's last at the federal court level, said Assistant Attorney General Thomas Brunker. His next avenue is the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver. Campbell is also deciding whether to adopt a report filed last year by U.S. Magistrate Judge Samuel Alba, which recommended dismissal of Gardner's federal appeal. (source: Salt Lake Tribune)
