Oct. 4 TEXAS: Judge waits on death row case A decision on whether death row inmate Milton Mathis is mentally retarded will not occur until final paperwork has been filed by lawyers in his case, even though a decision on the matter was expected on Friday. Mathis, 26, stands accused of killing two men in a drug house in Houston by shooting them in an incident that also left a girl paralyzed for life. A Fort Bend County jury sentenced him to execution in a 1999 trial in the 268th District Court of Judge Brady Elliott. Mathis' lawyers argued his poor performance at school, his awkward personal habits and several IQ tests suggest he has mild retardation. Stephen Doggett presented final arguments on Friday, arguing his client has mental retardation and may not be executed according to the 2002 Atkins v. Virginia Supreme Court ruling. Elliott will be deciding the matter. Earlier this month, he heard testimony from a series of friends, family and coworkers of Mathis, plus several psychological experts. Even if Mathis does not appear retarded, he meets the retardation standards of the American Association on Mental Retardation and the Texas State Health Commission, argued Doggett. "If the Milton Mathis case isn't what the Atkins decision is about, then I don't know what is," he said. Prosecutor Fred Felcman, however, described Mathis as "street smart" and said evidence points to an anti-social personality rather than mental retardation. "This man is extremely sophisticated, judge. If me and you lived in his world, we'd get eaten alive," he said. Also, it was not until the Atkins ruling that any psychologist diagnosed Mathis as retarded. The psychologists called to testify in the 1999 trial did not identify him as such, even though that could have been a mitigating factor to prevent a death sentence. "All the prior testimony confirms that nobody thought he was mentally retarded until Atkins," he said. Felcman pointed out the dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia in the Atkins decision, saying the ruling left no standard for retardation and opens the path to extensive arguments. Power outages and other complications related to Hurricane Rita prevented Doggett from presenting a report by a psychologist on Mathis, he said. Elliott allowed both sides time to file final documents related to the case, and will make his decision after reviewing the extensive court filings. (source: The Herald-Coaster) USA: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) will hold its fall meeting in Washington, D.C., Nov. 14-17 at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill. The agenda will include: a statement re-presenting Catholic teaching on the death penalty, "A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death"; a document titled "Co-workers in the Vineyard of the Lord: Resource for Guiding Development of Lay Ecclesial Ministry"; an update on the Catholic Campaign for Immigration Reform; a report on the progress being made by the Ad Hoc Committee on the Church in Africa; and several matters pertaining to the Church's liturgy, including discussion of the "Order of Mass" and debate and vote on the "Lectionary for Masses with Children." The Bishops will elect 7 new committee chairmen-elect and a new General Secretary. They will hear presentations by Cardinal Ignace Moussa I Daoud, Patriarch of Antioch, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, reporting on the 2008 Eucharistic Congress to be held in Quebec City, and Monsignor Richard Stern of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association. Representative of the news media seeking accreditation to cover the meeting for their organization must fill out an application form. (source : U.S. Newswire) MARYLAND: Death-Sentence Hearing Rejected----Md. Court Won't Let Man Argue Claims of Racial Inequality Maryland's highest court denied a condemned man's bid yesterday for a hearing to show that his sentence was rendered illegal by racial and other inequalities that his attorneys, citing a state-sponsored study, argue are pervasive in the application of the state's death penalty law. The ruling by the Court of Appeals, rejecting the request by Wesley E. Baker, turned on a question of procedure, Baker's attorney and legal experts said. The unanimous decision left unclear whether the court intends to address issues raised nearly three years ago when University of Maryland researchers announced that they had found disparities, by race and location, in the state's death penalty process. The researchers, led by criminal justice professor Raymond Paternoster, found that prosecutors were far more likely to seek the death penalty for black suspects charged with killing white victims, as Baker was in Baltimore County in 1991. The study, commissioned by Gov. Parris N. Glendening (D) in 2000, fueled efforts to impose a moratorium on executions and to push anti-death penalty measures in legislature, none of which passed. "Once again we have another branch of government sort of refusing to comment on the merits of the study," said Jane Henderson, executive director of Maryland Citizens Against State Executions. "Who's going to deal with it? The legislature hasn't addressed it, the governor hasn't addressed it and now the court has refused." Judge Glenn T. Harrell Jr., writing for the court, said that the defense's claims could not be presented in the manner in which Baker's attorneys had sought to put them before the court. The attorneys had presented the issues in a motion to correct an illegal sentence. The court ruled that the sentence was not illegal, but the decision did not rule out the possibility that the court might reconsider the claims if they were presented in a different form. Lawyers familiar with the case did not agree on what Harrell might have signaled about the court's intentions should the issues be argued again. Baker attorney Gary W. Christopher noted that oral arguments focused on the merits of the claims, not on their procedural aspects, and said that he believed the court remains "very seriously concerned and interested" in the issues. "The court has now given us a roadmap" for how to present the claims properly, he said, "and we'll certainly follow that roadmap." Prosecutors in the case weren't available to be interviewed. Stephen Bailey, deputy state's attorney in Baltimore County, said "the language of the opinion as a whole was very favorable to the state." He pointed to a footnote in which Harrell, after writing that the Baker case did not require the court to say whether a statistical study could demonstrate error in a specific case, cited a 1987 ruling in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that such analyses were insufficient to show that an individual case was prosecuted unfairly. "I don't think any fair-minded person who looked at the facts with Baker would conclude that the decision to seek the death penalty was based on race," Bailey said. Baker was convicted in 1992 of murdering Jane Tyson during a robbery in the parking lot of a Catonsville mall. According to trial testimony, Baker approached Tyson and her two grandchildren, pressed a gun to the left side of her head and squeezed the trigger. He was within days of his scheduled execution in 2002 when Glendening stayed the death sentence. The governor ordered a moratorium on executions to give Paternoster time to complete his analysis of the prosecutions of 6,000 homicides committed in Maryland from 1978 through 1999. Glendening's successor, Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R), lifted the moratorium. Paternoster, in announcing his findings, said the explanation for the disparities rested with state's attorneys, not juries, although he was careful not to impugn the prosecutors' motives. He said that his analysis "doesn't mean there is racial animus" by prosecutors but rather that "the product of their action does result in racial disparity." (source: Washington Post) VIRGINIA----new execution date Supreme Court rejects death row appeal The U.S. Supreme Court rejected hearing a Virginia death row inmate's appeal of his murder conviction in which some DNA evidence was destroyed. The nation's highest court turned down Robin Lovitt's appeal without comment Monday, a somewhat surprising decision since the court 12 weeks ago stayed his execution 4 1/2 ours before it was to be carried out, The Washington Post reported. Lovitt, 41, was convicted in the 1998 robbery and stabbing of pool hall manager Clayton Dicks, 45. "I'm so shocked, I'm speechless," said Minnie Lovitt, whose nephew has maintained he is innocent. "All I can do is continue to pray." Lovitt's supporters focused on Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner, who has never granted clemency since taking office in 2002. The state suggested a Nov. 30 execution in Jarratt, Va. Lovitt's appeal challenged destruction of inconclusive DNA samples, which a Virginia court clerk destroyed despite objections of 2 other clerks. Mary Dicks, the victim's mother, said she is convinced of Lovitt's guilt. (source: United Press International) ********************** Execution is on again for Lovitt----Arlington judge must set new date for killer of pool-hall manager Robin Lovitt is headed back to the state death house for the 1998 murder and robbery of an Arlington County pool hall manager. Just hours before he was to die by injection on July 11, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the execution pending a decision on whether it should hear his case. Yesterday, the high court turned him down without comment. Steven Engel, one of Lovitt's lawyers, said in an e-mail that they will pursue a clemency petition with Gov. Mark R. Warner. Kevin Hall, a Warner spokesman, said a clemency petition was filed by Lovitt in July but said he could not comment further. An Arlington circuit judge must set a new date within 10 days of receiving written notice of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision. The execution must take place within 60 days of the day on which the new date is set. In 2001, potentially critical evidence in Lovitt's case was destroyed by the Arlington Circuit Court clerk's office in violation of what was then a new state law. The law was enacted to save evidence in death cases should DNA testing later be required. Lovitt, 41, was on parole when he was arrested in the Nov. 18, 1998, death of Clayton Dicks, an Arlington pool-hall manager stabbed 6 times in his chest and back with scissors. According to the state, DNA played a marginal role in his prosecution. Lovitt's lawyers disagree and say retesting might cast doubt on his guilt. The evidence in his trial included three state DNA tests. One test suggested that Lovitt's DNA was present on the murder weapon, the prosecutor at Lovitt's trial told the jury. The other 2 tests, on Lovitt's jacket and on another part of the scissors, were inconclusive. However, William C. Thompson, a lawyer, criminology professor and DNA expert, said the state test did not show Lovitt's DNA on the murder weapon and strongly suggested the victim's DNA was not present on Lovitt's jacket. Emily Lucier, a spokeswoman for the Virginia attorney general's office, said the Supreme Court's decision was appropriate. "Our thoughts and prayers are with the victim's family," said Lucier. (source: Richmond Times-Dispatch) CALIFORNIA: Supreme Court says execute Calif man A leader of a Fresno crime ring who ordered killings from Folsom State Prison where he already was serving time for murder will likely be executed in January, authorities said Monday. Clarence Ray Allen, 75, is likely to become the 12th inmate executed since California's voters restored capital punishment in 1977. The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear his final legal challenge, 25 years after a hit man Allen hired murdered 3 people at a Fresno market. Allen feared the trio could hurt his chances of successfully appealing his murder conviction. Hours after the high court's decision, state prosecutors petitioned a judge to set a Jan. 17 execution at San Quentin State Prison. The nation's highest court declined to review a decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals which concluded in January that Allen should die despite the poor performance of his attorney during the stage of trial when jurors decide a sentence of life or death. The appeals court said his defense "fell below an objective standard of reasonableness." The court, however, said Allen's viciousness, not his attorney's ineffectiveness, was what mattered. The appeals court said it was inconsequential that Allen's attorney did little to prepare for the trial's penalty phase and failed "sufficiently to investigate and adequately present" evidence to sway jurors to render a judgment of life without parole. It was "not reasonably probable that even one juror would have held out for a life sentence over death," Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw wrote for the appeals court. She added that Allen was convicted of conspiring from prison to murder seven people, "all to retaliate for their prior testimony against him and to prevent future damaging testimony." Wardlaw added that, "If the death penalty is to serve any purpose at all, it is to prevent the very sort of murderous conduct for which Allen was convicted." Ward Campbell, supervising California deputy attorney general, said the appellate court's decision "reflects our office's sentiments for this case." Michael Satris, Allen's appellate attorney, declined comment. The man convicted of carrying out Allen's murder orders, Billy Ray Hamilton, also is on death row. Prosecutors said Hamilton was following Allen's orders when he killed Bryon Schletewitz, Douglas Scott White and Josephine Rocha. Allen suffered a heart attack last month, underwent surgery, and is recovering. The case is Allen v. Brown, 04-10556. (source: Associated Pess) ********************* Justices Turn Down Petition From Septuagenarian on Death Row----Lockyer Seeks January Execution of Man Convicted of Ordering Murder of Witness Attorney General Bill Lockyer yesterday asked a Northern California trial court to set a January execution date for a 75-year-old inmate whose petition for writ of certiorari was rejected earlier in the day by the U.S. Supreme Court. Lockyer urged the Superior Court in Glenn County to set Jan. 17 as the date when Clarence Ray Allen is to die death for masterminding the 1980 triple murder of Bryan Schletewitz, Josephine Rocha and Douglas Scott White at Fran's Market in Fresno. A hearing on the attorney generals motion was set for Nov. 18. The high court's order, issued without dissent, is the latest in a series of legal setbacks for Allen. In January, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied his bid for panel rehearing or en banc rehearing of the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition. At the time of the Fran's Market murders, Allen already was serving a life sentence in Folsom Prison for orchestrating the 1974 murder of Mary Sue Kitts. Schletewitz testified against Allen at the Kitts murder trial. Conspiracy Charged Prosecutors said that Allen, while at Folsom, conspired with fellow inmate Billy Ray Hamilton to murder witnesses who had testified against him, including Schletewitz. When Hamilton was paroled from Folsom Prison, according to testimony, he went to Fran's Market where Schletewitz worked and murdered Schletewitz and fellow employees Rocha and White with a sawed-off shotgun and wounded 2 other people. Hamilton was arrested 5 days later, and police said he had on his person a "hit list" with the names and addresses of witnesses who testified against Allen at the Kitts trial. Hamilton is also on death row. The Fran's Market trial was moved to Glenn County because of extensive pretrial publicity in Fresno County. It was prosecuted by the Attorney General's Office because an attorney who had represented Allen in a previous murder case had subsequently gone to work for the Fresno County district attorney. One of the prosecutors, Ronald Prager, is now a San Diego Superior Court judge. Robbery Ring In addition to the murders and attempted murders, Allen was convicted of conspiring to murder 8 people who had testified against members of a robbery ring over which Allen, who had been in the security business, was said to have presided. Special circumstances of prior murder, multiple murder, and witness killing were found true. In the penalty phase, prosecutors presented evidence of Allen's involvement in 10 prior violent crimes and of six prior felony convictions. The California Supreme Court upheld the death sentence in 1986 and the U.S. Supreme Court denied direct review in 1988; Allen's habeas petition was denied in a ruling by a Ninth Circuit panel in May of last year. That panel - Judges Kim M. Wardlaw, Susan Graber, and Richard Clifton agreed that Allen's trial lawyer had rendered substandard performance in failing to present a case in mitigation. But it agreed with the other courts that had heard the claim that there was no prejudice because there would not have been enough evidence to overcome the strong evidence in aggravation, given the viciousness of the killings, the fact that they were part of a conspiracy which included plans to murder four other people, and the defendants past criminal history. It was "not reasonably probable that even one juror would have held out for a life sentence over death," Wardlaw wrote. Wardlaw added that, "If the death penalty is to serve any purpose at all, it is to prevent the very sort of murderous conduct for which Allen was convicted." Allen's appellate lawyer, Michael Satris, was not available for comment yesterday. When the panel decision was handed down, he told The Recorder, a San Francisco legal newspaper, that the panel was wrong to have conducted a hypothetical penalty phase by weighing evidence the jury never got to hear. (source: Metropolitan News Company)
