Nov. 24 ARKANSAS: Visitation changes needed, advocate says A state prison spokesman Wednesday denied a death-penalty opponent's charge that the state has unfairly limited family visits to condemned killer Eric Nance in the days leading up to his scheduled execution. Nance is to be put to death Monday night at the Cummins Unit for killing a Malvern teenager 12 years ago. Betsey Wright of Rogers, who served as former President Clinton's chief-of-staff when he was Arkansas governor and now ministers to death-row inmates, said this week that Nance's family has not been allowed to take pictures of him during visits. She also complained that prison officials were only allowing 3 family members to see the death-row inmate. "Betsey Wright's e-mail is just wrong," prison spokeswoman Dina Tyler said Wednesday. "Eric Nance's execution and the visitation leading up to it will be handled the same way all the others have been." Tyler said it is state Department of Correction policy to expand the visitation privileges for death-row inmates a few days before the pending execution. She said Nance's visits are to be expanded today. "He has visitation scheduled up until the day of his execution," Tyler said. His spiritual adviser and attorney are scheduled to visit him Monday, she said. Beginning today, Nance will be allowed to see up to four visitors at a time at the Varner Supermax unit, Tyler said. If more than four show up, visitors will be rotated in and out of the room where Nance will be located. Visitors are not allowed to bring cameras into Varner Supermax, but visitors will be allowed to bring cameras and take pictures after Nance is moved to the Cummins unit, where the prison system carries out executions, Tyler said. For security reasons, the department does not reveal when the inmates will be moved to the death chamber, she said. Nance was convicted in Hot Spring County and sentenced to death in the 1993 murder of a 18-year-old Julie Heath. The teenager disappeared Oct. 11, 1993, and her car was found along U.S. 270. Her throat had been slashed with a box cutter. "We are going to do Eric Nance's execution like we've done the others before, and that is as professional as possible with respect for Eric Nance, his family and the victim's family," Tyler said. (source: Arkansas News) USA: US Nears 1000th Execution Since 1977----United States Nears 1000th Execution Since 10-Year Halt to Death Penalty Ended in 1977 "Let's do it." With those last words, convicted killer Gary Gilmore ushered in the modern era of capital punishment in the United States, an age of busy death chambers that will likely see its 1,000th execution in the coming days. After a 10-year moratorium, Gilmore in 1977 became the first person to be executed following a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision that validated state laws to reform the capital punishment system. Since then, 997 prisoners have been executed, and next week, the 998th, 999th and 1,000th are scheduled to die. Robin Lovitt, 41, will likely be the one to earn that macabre distinction next Wednesday, Nov. 30. He was convicted of fatally stabbing a man with scissors during a 1998 pool hall robbery in Virginia. Ahead of Lovitt on death row are Eric Nance, scheduled to be executed Monday in Arkansas, and John Hicks, scheduled to be executed Tuesday in Ohio. Both executions appear likely to proceed. Gilmore was executed before a Utah firing squad, after a record of petty crime, killing of a motel manager and suicide attempts in prison. His life was the basis for Norman Mailer's book "The Executioner's Song" and a TV miniseries. While his case was well-known, most today could probably not name even one of the more than 3,400 prisoners including 118 foreign nationals on death row in the U.S. In the last 28 years, the U.S. has executed on average one person every 10 days. The focus of the debate on capital punishment was once the question of whether it served as a deterrent to crime. Today, the argument is more on whether the government can be trusted not to execute an innocent person. Thomas Hill, an attorney for a death row inmate in Ohio who recently won a 2nd stay of execution, thinks the answer is obvious. "We have a criminal system that makes mistakes. If you accept that proposition, that means you have to be prepared for the inevitability that some are sentenced to death for crimes they didn't commit," said Hill. But advocates of the death penalty argue that its opponents are elitist liberals who are ignoring the real victims. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Splitting the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit -- Breakup is inevitable "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." (United States Constitution; Article III, Section 1). Every few decades, Congress must exercise its Constitutional authority and realign the U.S. Courts of Appeals into more efficient and manageable circuits that best represent the people within the circuit and provide them with an expeditious judicial process. This happened most recently in 1981, when the 11th Circuit of Alabama, Florida and Georgia was created, leaving Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas in the Fifth Circuit. With the support of House leaders, the House last week passed a two-way split of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a resolution that is included in the budget reconciliation. The split would create a new Ninth Circuit consisting of California, Guam, Hawaii, and the Northern Marianas Islands and a new 12th Circuit consisting of Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, Oregon and Washington. The Senate is now considering the resolution in its version of the budget reconciliation. Putting aside any political, historical or emotional arguments, the numbers speak for themselves on why a split of the Ninth Circuit is inevitable: In short, it has become disproportionately large in relation to the other regional circuits and unwieldy to the point that a more expeditious legal process could be gained through smaller, more manageable circuits. Here are a few of the statistics: -- More than 58 million Americans, or 1 in 5 citizens, reside in the Ninth Circuit. The next largest circuit has 26 million fewer residents. The Ninth Circuit has 8.9 million more people than the First, Eighth and 10th Circuits combined. -- The Ninth Circuit covers nearly 40 % of the land area of the United States and stretches from the Arctic Circle to the Mexican border and across the Pacific to the International Dateline. This requires a significant amount of travel at great expense in both time for the judges and cost for the taxpayers. -- The Ninth Circuit has 51 authorized and senior judges, which is nearly twice the number of total judges for the next largest circuit. It has the highest number of appeals filed and the 2nd-highest annual percentage increase in filings. It has more than triple the average number of appeals filed of all the other circuits. It has the most number of appeals still pending and the second-longest median time until disposition. It is the only circuit to sit on "limited" 11-judge en banc panels, which can result in a "majority" of six judges who could represent the minority view of the full court. It just makes sense that the people of the Pacific Northwest and the Rocky Mountain West should be represented by their own circuit court and allowed to develop a body of case law reflecting their respective populations. Issues in San Diego and San Francisco can differ greatly from those in Billings, Fairbanks, Pocatello, Yuma or Yakima. When judges are less burdened with travel and case monitoring, they have a better ability to understand the dynamics of their region. Ninth Circuit Judges Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain (Oregon) and Richard C. Tallman (Washington) wrote in the Wall Street Journal that "...size adversely affects not only the speed with which justice is administered, but also the quality of judicial decision making. Consistent interpretation of the law by an appellate court requires a reasonably small body of judges who have the opportunity to sit and to confer together frequently, and who can read, critique and, when necessary, correct each others' decisions. That kind of collegiality is no longer possible in a circuit of this size." Those who seek to maintain the Ninth Circuit's expanse can rest easier knowing that when the Ninth is split into 2 circuits, the "new Ninth" -- consisting of California, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands -- will continue to hold its position as the largest circuit in the United States. It is only a matter of time before the Ninth Circuit is split into more manageable circuits that reflect their populations more closely. With the continued backing of House leaders and Judiciary Committee, I fully expect we will split the Ninth Circuit. It's not a matter of "if" the Ninth Circuit will be split; it is now a matter of "when." (source: Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, is serving his fourth term in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he is a member of the House Appropriations Committee. He sponsored the legislation to split the Ninth Circuit; Opinion, San Francisco Chronicle) **************** Split the Ninth Circuit----We judge a congressional proposal to be unappealing. In a surprise move before the Nov. 2 election, a closely divided House approved a floor amendment offered by Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho that would split the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals into three smaller circuits. The new Ninth would consist of California and Hawaii, plus Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands. A new 12th Circuit would comprise Arizona, Nevada, Idaho and Montana, and a new 13th Circuit would consist of Washington, Oregon and Alaska. All these states and territories make up the current Ninth Circuit. We are reliably informed that the Senate may take up the bill in its rump session, scheduled to start Tuesday. Splitting a federal judicial circuit is exceedingly rare--it has happened only twice since the appellate circuits were created in 1891. It is a complex process that risks seriously disrupting the administration of justice. Contrary to popular belief, judicial circuits are much more than just courts of appeals; they comprise numerous lower courts and administrative units--thousands of people in all. While these units have some autonomy, they are centrally administered and share many important functions. Dividing the Ninth and setting up administrative structures for the 2 new circuits would be enormously disruptive and expensive--initial cost estimates run to $130 million. Worse, the new circuits would keep throwing away an estimated $22 million every year, duplicating each other's core functions. This is a luxury that the federal courts, now facing their direst budget crisis in memory, can't afford. Federal courts are making plans for cutting back key services and laying off numerous staff members who serve the public. Splitting the circuit will require further layoffs of experienced staff so that the new circuits can hire inexperienced replacements at different locales. It will necessitate construction of new courthouses, leaving present buildings underused. 3 circuits, with their triplicate headquarters, clerk's offices, procurement divisions and other administrative functions, will force judges to spend much more time feeding the administrative beast rather than deciding cases. Litigants will have to wait even longer for their cases to be resolved. Splitting the circuit would hurt the public in other ways. People and businesses make decisions with an eye toward legal consequences, so they need a clearly established body of law. Today, a Ninth Circuit decision is binding in nine Western states. After the split, a decision of the new Ninth Circuit would leave the law unclear in the 7 states of the 12th and 13th Circuits. To get the law settled for all these states, the same issue would have to be decided by the 2 new circuits, which could take years. More circuits also means more conflicts in the law, increasing the burden on the Supreme Court to set matters straight. Those most familiar with the workings of the Ninth Circuit--its circuit judges--have consistently voted to oppose a split, most recently by a 3-to-1 margin. A congressionally ordered study conducted by retired (now deceased) Justice Byron White thoroughly considered and rejected the idea that the Ninth should be split, finding it unnecessary and impractical. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California strongly opposes the split, as do Govs. Gary Locke of Washington and Janet Napolitano of Arizona. So do the American Bar Association and the Federal Bar Association, as well as the bars of many states. The argument that the Ninth Circuit should nonetheless be split relies almost entirely on its size--and, indeed, the Ninth is the largest of the federal circuits, as it has been for almost a century. But big doesn't mean inefficient, as we know from the performance of giant corporations such as Microsoft and Wal-Mart. Indeed, size brings into play economies of scale, so the Ninth offers innovative and valuable services to the public that smaller circuits cannot afford. Admittedly, some judges would benefit from a split: They would have less territory to cover and, in the 2 new circuits, the number of cases per judge would be cut just about in half. But a split can only reallocate cases, not eliminate them, so these judges' leisure will be paid for by added costs and delay to litigants left behind in an overburdened Ninth Circuit. The increased convenience of a few judges does not justify the colossal expenditure of public funds, nor the inconvenience, cost, delay and disruption to the administration of justice that a split would inevitably bring with it. Issues of size, cost and efficiency should be carefully considered using the normal processes of congressional deliberation. House and Senate subcommittees have already started building a record that could be used as a basis for meaningful floor debate. But this process was cut short by the Simpson Amendment, which came to the floor on less than 24 hours' notice and without a committee record. Not surprisingly, many of the floor comments reflected a sad lack of understanding of the complex machinery of the Ninth Circuit and the implications of the proposed legislation. A decision that will drastically alter the way justice is administered in nine Western states, and affect the access to justice of 56 million Americans, deserves to be made openly, calmly and after due deliberation--not by stealth and procedural manipulation. (source: Opinion, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 14----Judges Kozinski and Thomas were appointed to the Ninth Circuit in 1985 (by President Reagan) and 1996 (by President Clinton), respectively. If their circuit is split, the former, a Californian, would remain in the Ninth, while the latter, from Montana, would move to the 12th) ************* Williams' Attorneys Launch New Effort to Stay Execution Lawyers for the Crips co-founder ask the state Supreme Court to allow access to evidence they say was withheld during the 1979 trial. Attorneys for Stanley Tookie Williams, co-founder of the Crips gang, implored the California Supreme Court on Wednesday to grant them access to a broad array of trial evidence as part of an effort to show that his 1979 conviction for four Southern California murders was unconstitutional. "Discovery must be granted to avoid an egregious miscarriage of justice," Pasadena attorney Verna Wefald wrote in a last-ditch legal effort to prevent 51-year-old Williams' execution, scheduled for Dec. 13 at San Quentin State Prison. Williams' attorneys also have formally asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant him clemency for his work as an anti-gang activist on death row. Wefald is seeking the information under a 2003 California law enacted in the aftermath of the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart corruption scandal. She asserts that the defense is entitled to material improperly withheld by the prosecution. In response to an earlier defense motion, Deputy Atty. Gen. Lisa J. Brault said Williams had been provided material through the court discovery process. Prosecutors are required to turn over anything that might help a defendant prove his innocence. On Wednesday, Wefald argued that the attorney general's office "knows that none of the prior discovery included any of the items Williams now seeks." Among the information are ballistics and crime scene evidence, records about witnesses who testified against Williams in return for immunity or other benefits, and medical records that might show Williams was subjected to forced drugging while in jail awaiting trial. "The prosecution kept secret considerable exculpatory evidence at trial, on direct appeal, and throughout state and federal habeas corpus proceedings," Wefald wrote. "The prosecution now hopes to take advantage of its own misconduct by claiming that Mr. Williams discovered this suppression of exculpatory evidence too late." Wefald started doing research on Williams' case earlier this year, but she was not formally appointed by the California Supreme Court to represent him until Oct. 21. Wefald also sharply countered the attorney general's contention that she could have gotten the information from Williams' trial lawyer, Joe Ingber. In a brief filed earlier in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the attorney general's office "repeatedly stated that - Ingber's files for Williams' case were 'lost' quite some time ago," Wefald wrote. If the defense motion is granted, Wefald hopes to review the evidence with an eye toward filing Williams' fifth state habeas corpus petition, seeking to show that his conviction was improper. The state Supreme Court, however, has set a high standard for permitting repeated petitions of this kind. The defendant has to allege "that error of constitutional magnitude led to a trial that was so fundamentally unfair that absent the error no reasonable judge or jury would have convicted the petitioner" and/or the defendant was innocent. (source: Los Angeles Times) ***************** Nobel Laureates urge clemency for Stanley 'Tookie' Williams In a letter released Wednesday, a group of Nobel laureates joined activists in urging Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant clemency to Stanley "Tookie" Williams, who is set to be executed Dec. 13. In the letter, Nobel laureates Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, Betty Williams and Jody Williams and nearly 120 other people call on the governor to commute Williams' "sentence of death to life in prison." Williams -- who co-founded the Crips street gang in Los Angeles and was sentenced to death in 1981 for the shotgun murders of four people in the Southland -- has renounced his gang past and written a series of acclaimed children's books. "Through his work, gang truces have been mediated and long-standing wounds have been healed. Lives have been saved," the letter to the governor says. "... That an inmate on San Quentin's death row has earned five nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize and four for the Nobel Prize for Literature requires consideration." The group is calling on Schwarzenegger "to affirm the human capacity for personal transformation and reinforce the meaning of hope for young people everywhere." Others who signed the letter include actors Jason Alexander, Danny Glover, Anjelica Huston, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon and Noah Wyle, singer Bonnie Raitt, former New York governor Mario Cuomo, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and a number of other religious leaders. Williams is facing execution next month unless the governor grants his clemency request -- something no condemned murderer in California has been granted since 1967. A team of attorneys representing the convicted murderer have submitted two sets of documents to the governor, saying in their most recent filing earlier this week that "giving Stanley Williams life is the right decision because it does the most good." Los Angeles County prosecutors urged the governor in their own filing last week to deny clemency to Williams, writing that "this cold-blooded killer, Stanley Williams, now seeks mercy, the very mercy he so callously denied" the four murder victims. The prosecutors said he has never accepted responsibility for the murders of Albert Owens, a Whittier 7-Eleven employee, and the shotgun murders of Thsai-Shai Yang, Yen-I Yang and Yee Chen Lin at a South Vermont Avenue motel less than 2 weeks later. Included in the response were letters from law enforcement officials and two family members of one of his victims -- all urging the governor to let the execution proceed. (source: North County Times) ****************** Scott Peterson Sues His Former Lawyer Scott Peterson is attempting to halt publication of a book written by a lawyer who was kicked off his case for violating a judge's gag order. A Superior Court judge declined to grant a request for emergency relief during a hearing Wednesday, likely pushing the case before an appellate court next week, Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, said Wednesday night. "We're seeking appellate relief to prevent a lawyer who was employed for the briefest of times from capitalizing on that employment and violating his oath as a lawyer," Geragos told The Associated Press. Matthew Dalton was employed with Geragos & Geragos during the early stages of the Peterson case. He was removed after violating a judge's order not to speak with the media. In an August 2003 conversation with reporters, Dalton floated a human sacrifice theory in the killing of Peterson's wife, Laci. Peterson was sentenced to death for the 2002 murder of his pregnant wife and their unborn son. His lawyers did not pursue the human sacrifice defense at trial. His case is on automatic appeal. Dalton's book, "Presumed Guilty," is scheduled for publication Dec. 13 by Atria Books, an imprint of Simon & Schuster. The book's subtitle is "What the jury never knew about Laci Peterson's murder and why Scott Peterson should not be on death row." Messages left after hours for Dalton and Simon & Schuster officials were not immediately returned. Geragos said Dalton left before Peterson's preliminary hearing and has not seen many of the documents that were filed in the case. He also does not have permission to reveal any information about Peterson. (source: Associated Press) ************ Williams' Attorneys Launch New Effort to Stay Execution----Lawyers for the Crips co-founder ask the state Supreme Court to allow access to eidence they say was withheld during the 1979 trial. Attorneys for Stanley Tookie Williams, co-founder of the Crips gang, implored the California Supreme Court on Wednesday to grant them access to a broad array of trial evidence as part of an effort to show that his 1979 conviction for four Southern California murders was unconstitutional. "Discovery must be granted to avoid an egregious miscarriage of justice," Pasadena attorney Verna Wefald wrote in a last-ditch legal effort to prevent 51-year-old Williams' execution, scheduled for Dec. 13 at San Quentin State Prison. Williams' attorneys also have formally asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant him clemency for his work as an anti-gang activist on death row. Wefald is seeking the information under a 2003 California law enacted in the aftermath of the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart corruption scandal. She asserts that the defense is entitled to material improperly withheld by the prosecution. In response to an earlier defense motion, Deputy Atty. Gen. Lisa J. Brault said Williams had been provided material through the court discovery process. Prosecutors are required to turn over anything that might help a defendant prove his innocence. On Wednesday, Wefald argued that the attorney general's office "knows that none of the prior discovery included any of the items Williams now seeks." Among the information are ballistics and crime scene evidence, records about witnesses who testified against Williams in return for immunity or other benefits, and medical records that might show Williams was subjected to forced drugging while in jail awaiting trial. "The prosecution kept secret considerable exculpatory evidence at trial, on direct appeal, and throughout state and federal habeas corpus proceedings," Wefald wrote. "The prosecution now hopes to take advantage of its own misconduct by claiming that Mr. Williams discovered this suppression of exculpatory evidence too late." Wefald started doing research on Williams' case earlier this year, but she was not formally appointed by the California Supreme Court to represent him until Oct. 21. Wefald also sharply countered the attorney general's contention that she could have gotten the information from Williams' trial lawyer, Joe Ingber. In a brief filed earlier in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the attorney general's office "repeatedly stated that . Ingber's files for Williams' case were 'lost' quite some time ago," Wefald wrote. If the defense motion is granted, Wefald hopes to review the evidence with an eye toward filing Williams' fifth state habeas corpus petition, seeking to show that his conviction was improper. The state Supreme Court, however, has set a high standard for permitting repeated petitions of this kind. The defendant has to allege "that error of constitutional magnitude led to a trial that was so fundamentally unfair that absent the error no reasonable judge or jury would have convicted the petitioner" and/or the defendant was innocent. (source: Los Angeles Times) ***************** Nobel Laureates, Faith Leaders, Celebrities Join----Growing Chorus Requesting Clemency for Stanley Tookie Williams Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mike Farrell, Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo Among Activists Lending Voice to Message of Redemption, Peace and Hope In a letter released today, a group of Nobel laureates, celebrity activists, faith leaders and policy-makers urged Gov. Schwarzenegger to grant clemency for Stanley Tookie Williams, recognizing the five-time Nobel Peace Prize nominee's valuable contributions to steer inner-city youth away from crime and gangs. "Each year at the holiday season, voices the world over cry out for peace," the letter reads. "This year, one of them, a voice of great power, will be lost unless you act." The letter cites William's work, including a remarkable collection of children's books which landed him 4 Nobel Literature Prize nominations, as well as his tireless efforts to answer each and every request from schools, ministers, and community leaders asking him to help them teach messages of redemption, peace and hope to inner city children. "Through his work, gang truces have been mediated and long-standing wounds have been healed. Lives have been saved," the letter states. It concludes with a plea for the governor to use his executive power to "affirm the human capacity for personal transformation and reinforce the meaning of hope for young people everywhere." "We have far more to gain from granting clemency to Stanley Williams than from killing him, an act of violence that serves no purpose," said Mike Farrell. "Growing up where violence is a too-readily-accepted way of life, Stanley made that choice and knows what it costs. Today, uniquely qualified to reach our children, Stanley encourages thousands with his message of change, of possibility, of hope. We urge the governor to lead us away from the politics of vengeance, to let the children see that change matters and there is reason to hope." A shortlist of the letter's signatories include: * Nobel laureates: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, Betty Williams, Jody Williams; * Celebrities: Jason Alexander, Laurence Fishburne, Danny Glover, Anjelica Huston, Bonnie Raitt, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Noah Wyle; * Mario Cuomo, Julian Bond, Reps. Jim McDermott, Jim McGovern, George Miller, and Sen. Tom Harkin, Rev. Jesse Jackson. They are joined by thousands of citizens who have signed an online petition (http://www.savetookie.org) in support of clemency, as well as ministers, teachers and community leaders across the nation who have written to the governor asking that he weigh the value of Williams' efforts, his message and his example against a death sentence following a trial marred by disturbing racial bias and dishonorable conduct. A copy of the letter, along with a full list of its signatories is posted online at http://www.cm-p.com/clemency.htm (source: Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP; PR Newswire) WISCONSIN: Avery's case helps spark talk of reinstating death penalty Weeks ago, state lawmakers called Steven Avery the poster boy for law changes designed to help ensure no man would spend time in prison for a crime he did not commit. Now, with Avery back behind bars after being charged with the grisly murder of a 25-year-old photographer, some lawmakers are citing him in their push to resurrect the death penalty in Wisconsin. "It's sad that this murder occurs but it brings the whole issue of the death penalty back in the news," said state Senate President Alan Lasee, R-De Pere, who has fought to bring back capital punishment for decades. Wisconsin's 1853 ban on the practice is the longest-standing one of any of the 12 states without it. Attempts to reinstate the punishment - which resulted in 4 hangings in the 1840s and 1850s - have repeatedly failed over the past 152 years. Lasee's plan, introduced in February, calls for a nonbinding referendum asking voters whether the state should use the death penalty in cases involving multiple murders and strong DNA evidence. The lawmaker said he is so incensed by the murder and mutilation of Teresa Halbach in his eastern Wisconsin district that he will amend the resolution to apply to single murders. "It's pretty gruesome what happened to her," he said. But Avery illustrates the danger that authorities could put innocent people to death, said Keith Findley, co-director of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, which helped free Avery from prison in 2003 for the 1985 rape he did not commit. "It is in the end a human system and it cannot be made infallible," Findley said. Avery, 43, was charged with 1st-degree murder and mutilation of a corpse earlier this month after investigators said they found Halbach's remains, including teeth and bone fragments, at his family's property near Mishicot. Halbach disappeared Oct. 31 after she went to the Avery family's auto salvage business to take a picture of a vehicle for sale. The next day, lawmakers gave final approval to a series of criminal justice reforms known as the "Steven Avery bill" designed to prevent wrongful convictions. Avery was exonerated after DNA evidence showed another man already serving time for sexual assault committed the rape. Gov. Jim Doyle and lawmakers appeared with Avery at a news conference in August to endorse the reforms recommended by the so-called Avery task force. Doyle is expected to soon sign the resulting legislation, which would expedite DNA tests that could exonerate prisoners and force police to adopt written policies on using witnesses to identify suspects. Lasee's resolution for a death penalty referendum, which could get a public hearing as early as next week, needs to pass the Senate and the Assembly before it could appear on statewide ballots next year. If voters support bringing back the death penalty, lawmakers would still have to pass a bill doing so and have the governor sign it into law. State Sen. Tom Reynolds, R-West Allis, meanwhile, introduced a bill last week to reinstate the death penalty in cases in which a person is charged with murder, sexual assault and mutilation of a corpse. Avery would not qualify since prosecutors have not charged him with sexual assault. Reynolds said it was a coincidence his bill was introduced as Avery's case dominated the headlines, though he felt that may help his cause. He said he started looking into the bill after a convicted sex offender murdered and dismembered a 19-year-old woman he lured into his West Allis apartment in 2003. "When a murderer takes somebody else's life, their life should be taken," he said. ON THE NET----Wisconsin Legislature: http://www.legis.state.wi.us) (source: Associated Press) FLORIDA: Defense: Man accused of killing police officer has mental illness In Panama City, an attorney for a Wisconsin man charged with killing a Panama City Beach police officer said in court filings Tuesday that the man's mental health will be key in his death penalty case. Robert Bailey, 23, is charged with 1st-degree murder in the shooting death of Sgt. Kevin Knight during a March 27 traffic stop. Bailey's trial is scheduled to start Jan. 30. In motions filed Tuesday, Deputy Public Defender Walter Smith said Bailey suffers from a list of mental illnesses including severe memory disorder, bipolar disorder and paranoid delusional disorder. Smith asked Circuit Judge Glenn Hess to determine Bailey's competency to stand trial and whether he is mentally retarded. Florida does not execute the mentally retarded. The standard, however, is that Smith will have to prove Bailey's retardation was present before he turned 18. Last month, Bailey wrote Hess and told him that he was tired of fighting the murder charge and wanted to plead guilty. "I just want to get to prison so I can see my family and hold my son," he wrote. (source: Associated Press)
