August 24 TENNESSEE: State v. Arthur T. Copeland - E2002-01123-CCA-R3-DD View Blount County - The defendant, Arthur T. Copeland, was convicted by a Blount County jury of 1 count of first degree premeditated murder. The jury found that the state proved 1 aggravating circumstance: The defendant was previously convicted of 1 or more felonies involving violence to the person. Upon its further finding that the aggravating circumstance outweighed the mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury sentenced the defendant to death. In this appeal as of right, the defendant raises issues regarding the sufficiency of the evidence; the exclusion of jurors; an invalid indictment; the admission of certain testimony; the exclusion of expert testimony; his right to testify in his own defense; the denial of due process; the denial of his motion for continuance; the denial of his motion to suppress; error by the trial court during voir dire; the denial of a change of venue; prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument in the guilt and sentencing phases; discovery violations by the prosecution; error in allowing the introduction of certain photographs; denial of a request for a special jury instruction; the failure to charge the jury on a self-defense theory; the refusal to disqualify the district attorney's office; the refusal to excuse trial counsel from post-trial representation of the defendant; the failure to grant a new trial based on newly discovered evidence; improper jury instructions; the denial of expert funding for development and use of mitigation evidence; the admission of photos of the victim; the cumulative effects of errors during the guilt and sentencing phases; and various constitutional challenges to the death penalty and to the statutory capital sentencing procedure in this state. After review, this court concludes that reversible error attended the trial court's response to defendant's decision not to testify and that the death penalty in this case is disproportionate to the particular offense. We therefore reverse the conviction and sentence. (source: Tenn. Court of Criminal Appeals) MISSOURI----impending execution Lawsuit calls execution method cruel Even as the state prepares to execute Timothy Johnston next week for killing his wife, a lawsuit questioning the method of execution remains unresolved. The suit on behalf of Johnston, 44, claims Missouri's three-drug method of lethal injection violates his constitutional right against cruel and unusual punishment. It was filed more than a year ago in U.S. District Court in St. Louis, and the court denied the state's motion to dismiss it as frivolous. Johnston's attorney, Chris McGraugh of St. Louis, is seeking a temporary injunction to halt the execution scheduled for 12:01 a.m. Aug. 31 at the prison in Bonne Terre, at least until the lawsuit is decided. A hearing on the injunction is Friday. "The court has said we're entitled to move through the system with this lawsuit," McGraugh said Wednesday. "Give us our day in court. That's all we're asking for." A spokesman for Gov. Matt Blunt declined comment. Attorney General Jay Nixon, whose office is representing the state, said the lawsuit is an effort to "delay the inevitable." "The state of Missouri has gone to great lengths with the help of scientific and medical personnel to make our system quick and effective," Nixon said. On June 30, 1989, paramedics responded to a 911 call to Johnston's home in St. Louis. The sidewalk and porch were bloody. Inside, they found Johnston bent over the body of his wife, Nancy, her face and torso swollen and bloodied. She was declared dead at the scene. An autopsy revealed a broken nose, collarbone and ribs; severe injuries to her head, face and scalp; bruising and tearing in her liver, heart and spleen. Bleeding under the skin indicated she was alive through most of the beating. Johnston initially blamed a motorcycle gang, but later confessed. He said he killed her because he believed she had been unfaithful. He was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. Missouri has executed 61 inmates, all men, since the death penalty was renewed in 1989. All 61 were put to death by injection. Other lawsuits nationally have claimed lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment. Johnston's lawsuit questions the way Missouri does it. In Missouri, the condemned inmate lies on a gurney in a plain white room, viewed by witnesses from his family, the victim's family and the state - typically media and perhaps police officers or prosecutors involved in the case. >From another room, unseen by observers, a Department of Corrections employee is directed to begin the process. Through an IV tube running from the unseen room to the execution chamber, the inmate is injected first with sodium pentothal, which renders him unconscious. About a minute later, panchromium bromide, which stops the respiratory system, is administered. Finally, usually after another minute, potassium chloride, which stops the heart, is injected. Typically, the inmate is declared dead about 3 minutes after the process begins, though a few of the executions have taken longer. But the lawsuit claims there is no guarantee that the 1st drug always works. "What we're saying is that if you don't administer the first drug right, what happens when the second one gets in you is it paralyzes you with no way to indicate to anyone that you're being suffocated," McGaugh said. The lawsuit also questions why Corrections Department staffers, and not medical personnel, administer the injections. Corrections Department spokesman John Fougere declined to discuss details of the process, citing safety and security reasons. He said medical staff members are present, but declined to say what role they play. A ruling by the Missouri Supreme Court in 1997 rejected several other arguments aimed at stopping Johnston's execution. Among other things, the court ruled that neurological testing showed he did not suffer from brain damage. It also turned away arguments that the case lacked premeditation, ruling that courts have repeatedly upheld the death sentence where the victim was abused, beaten and tortured. (source: Associated Press) INDIANA----impending execution Board Recommends Against Clemency For Death Row Inmate The Indiana Parole Board voted 3-1 on Wednesday to recommend that a Montgomery County man be executed despite claims that he was mentally ill when he killed his pregnant wife and his parents in 1985. Arthur Baird II is scheduled to die by chemical injection on Aug. 31 for killing his parents, Kathryn and Arthur Baird. He also was sentenced to 60 years in prison for killing his pregnant wife, Nadine, the day before his parents' slayings. Parole Board member Thor Miller said that Baird, 59, of Darlington had played an elaborate game of deceit in an attempt to avoid execution. "This is nothing but a brutally cruel man," Miller said. The board's recommendation to deny clemency now goes to Gov. Mitch Daniels. An appeal, which contends Baird is incompetent to be executed, is pending before the Indiana Supreme Court. Board member Valerie Parker said any stress Baird may have felt that led to the murders was self-imposed. "When considering the nature and circumstances of this offense, the first thing that comes to mind is just how senseless, vicious and horrible it was," she said. Attorneys and psychiatrists for Baird had urged the board earlier Wednesday to recommend clemency, saying Baird had suffered a series of mental illnesses that should spare him from execution. The state said courts had consistently rejected those arguments and upheld the death penalty. Deputy Attorney General Steve Creason said Baird has been escalating his insanity story in hopes of diverting attention from the seriousness of his crimes. Police said Baird confessed to the killings, saying he had just gone "berserk," according to a recent Indiana Supreme Court ruling. It said he believed the federal government was about to pay him $1 million for advice on solving the national debt, and he planned to buy a farm for $575,000. The money never arrived by the closing date, Baird was in debt and had been laid off from a factory job, but there was no evidence of a financial motive for the murders or of any bad relationship with his victims. Phil Coons, a forensic psychologist, said Baird had been sexually molested as a child and developed mental illnesses that included delusions and an obsessive-compulsive disorder that he largely masked for years. Coons said Baird was under intense stress, heard voices and felt possessed when the killings occurred. "These explosive outbursts of violence were like the perfect storm," Coons said. Baird told the parole board last week that he felt like "two beings" manipulated his hands as he strangled his wife in their mobile home. He said he didn't see any beings the next day but felt he was being controlled again when he fatally stabbed his parents. LaQuita Anglin, Nadine Baird's sister, was the only relative of the victims who testified. She said her parents forgave Baird after the murders and did not want him to be executed -- something she agreed with. "He is no harm to anyone in prison," she said. Life in prison without parole was not a sentencing option for murder in Indiana until 1994, but Robert Elmore, a juror in Baird's trial, testified there would have been sentiment for it over death. He said jurors opted for death in the parents' slayings because they believed Baird had time to regroup after strangling his wife and think about killing again. "I think if there had been life without parole -- I'm looking back 18 years -- I think we would have chosen that," he said. Creason, the deputy attorney general, said the crimes were a coverup for being in debt and other problems. "His crime was extremely self-indulgent. It was all about him," Creason said. He also noted that the Indiana Supreme Court had considered mental illness as a "low range" mitigating factor that was outweighed by the factors of multiple murders. Parole Board member Randall Gentry voted against the other board members. "In this case, I cannot determine without some degree of uncertainty that a mental disorder, mental illness or even insanity took over Mr. Baird at the times of these crimes, and thus I must recommend that Mr. Baird's request for clemency be granted, but his actions must not be condoned," he said. Unless Baird receives a late, favorable court ruling or Daniels grants clemency, he would become the fifth person executed in Indiana this year. (source: Associated Press)
