Feb. 6 PENNSYLVANIA: Death-penalty moratorium THANK YOU for Elmer Smith's excellent article on the wrongful convictions of Alfredo Domenech and Ivan Serrano. These egregious errors in our justice system often go unnoticed, and the wrongfully accused are often forgotten after spending decades in prison for crimes they didn't commit. State Sen. Greenleaf has announced a bill that will create a commission to examine why innocent people are convicted of crimes in Pennsylvania. We applaud him for acknowledging the serious flaws in Pennsylvania's justice system. We urge our legislators to impose an immediate moratorium on executions in this state while the "innocence commission" examines the defects in our justice system. 3 years ago, a committee of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recommended that Gov. Rendell and state legislators enact a moratorium due to concerns over bias against the poor and minorities. We are asking our government to enact a moratorium to prevent the state-sanctioned killing of innocent people. Recently, New Jersey imposed a moratorium on executions in order to study a variety of problems related to capital punishment. Our legislators must acknowledge that Pennsylvania has considerably more problems with capital punishment than New Jersey. New Jersey has had zero exonerations since 1976 while our state has had 7. There were 10 people on death row in New Jersey; there are 224 in Pennsylvania. 3 years ago, Gov. Ryan of Illinois commuted the sentence of all 156 inmates on Illinois' death row. He made this decision after 13 people on his state's death row had been found to be wrongfully convicted. "Because the Illinois death penalty system is arbitrary and capricious - and therefore immoral - I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death," he said. Lisa Ziemer, Chair, Southeast Chapter, Pennsylvania Abolitionists United Against the Death Penalty (source: Letter to the Editor, Philadelphia Daily News) FLORIDA: Florida's execution process faces death knell The way Florida administers the death penalty is fast becoming a national question after the U.S. Supreme Court halted 2 executions in recent weeks because of concerns over the state's use of lethal injection. The high court is considering whether 2 Florida killers have the right to challenge their death sentences on civil rights grounds based partly on a recent study that indicates lethal injections may cause more pain than previously thought, possibly violating the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment. But the question in Washington, D.C., is only part of the possible trouble facing Florida's death sentence, as the Florida Supreme Court suggested in a recent decision that legislators review the state's process because it may violate federal law. Florida is the only state in the country that does not require a unanimous jury verdict to determine at least one of the following two matters: whether a case qualifies for the death penalty or in the final vote on whether the death penalty should be ordered. Ultimately, the judge in each situation has the final say in Florida; the jury only makes a recommendation. "Florida's all alone out here. That's something that usually gets the (U.S.) Supreme Court's attention," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "Sometimes you want to preempt that and change your own law before the Supreme Court steps in and you have no law." Gov. Jeb Bush said the U.S. Supreme Court decision to stay the two recent executions probably will halt all executions in Florida until the justices make a final decision, which could come as early as April. That case addresses only the procedural question of whether death row inmates can get a hearing to determine whether Florida's lethal injection mixture is humane. If the Supreme Court rules that death row inmates have a right to such a hearing, a federal judge would have to hear a case on whether Florida's injection is cruel or inhumane. Bush defended Florida's system last week and said the problem was that lawyers and the courts had skewed the situation in favor of death row inmates to allow them to drag out their appeals processes for years. "The advocates of abolishing the death penalty are winning without any discussion by elected officials in the legislature," said Bush, a death penalty proponent. "I think it's wrong." The Florida Legislature soon will hear plenty of debate about the death penalty, as committees have begun fielding testimony about bills that would require a unanimous jury verdict to impose it. The bills are bipartisan: A Democrat is sponsoring the House version and a Republican filed the identical Senate version. Bush and House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City, have voiced their apprehension about tinkering with Florida's death penalty laws. "These are juries of our peers, hand-selected by both the prosecutor and the defense," Bense said. "If you have a majority that want the death penalty, then it should stay." But Senate President Tom Lee, R-Brandon, isn't so sure. Lee was at the Florida State Prison Jan. 25 when Clarence Hill was supposed to be executed. Hill, who shot and killed a Pensacola police officer in 1982, was the first man the U.S. Supreme Court recently granted a stay. On Tuesday, the high court did the same for Arthur Rutherford, a Panhandle man convicted of killing a Milton woman in 1985, on the same grounds. Lee went to Starke to witness Hill's execution because he understands that the Florida Supreme Court was sending a clear message to the legislature and he wanted to learn about a subject he realized would be key during the upcoming session, said his spokeswoman, Kathy Mears. "It is important to open up the dialogue and debate this issue given the pronouncement by the Supreme Court justices coupled with his (Lee's) desire to ensure that the death penalty remains a policy in Florida," Mears said. Death penalty laws have undergone many changes as cultural norms have evolved over the years, with the U.S. Supreme Court prompting many of those changes. Aggravating factors issue They have ruled the execution of minors and mentally retarded people unconstitutional but also changed the way the death penalty is imposed with a lesser-known case in 2002. In Ring vs. Arizona, the high court found that juries, not judges, must make certain factual determinations before imposing a death sentence. Those are referred to as aggravating factors, heightened criteria a crime must fall into after a defendant is found guilty of the crime, but before being considered for the death penalty. In Ring vs. Arizona, the jury found the defendant guilty, but the judge alone imposed a death sentence. It was unclear at the time whether that ruling affected four states, including Florida, that use a so-called "hybrid" sentencing system. In those systems, a judge makes the ultimate decision on life or death, but does so with a recommendation from the jury on the aggravating factors and the decision between life and death. Since Ring, 3 of the states have changed their systems, according to a Florida Senate staff analysis. Alabama and Indiana juries must find aggravating factors unanimously before a death sentence can be imposed, and Delaware placed the entire decision-making process in the hands of the juries. "We're the only ones who didn't change our system as a result of Ring," said D. Todd Doss, a Lake City attorney who represents Hill and is handling another dozen death penalty cases. The Florida Supreme Court, in a strongly worded October opinion, indicated that the legislature should reconsider the hybrid system because it may be in violation of Ring and other similar opinions from the U.S. Supreme Court. "The bottom line is that Florida is now the only state in the country that allows the death penalty to be imposed even though the penalty-phase jury may determine by a mere majority vote both whether aggravators exist and whether to recommend the death penalty," wrote Justice Raoul Cantero, a Bush appointee, in his majority opinion. But changing to a unanimous jury verdict has become a very divided debate. Last month, a line of state attorneys from around Florida spoke before the House Justice Council to warn them of the possible implications of a unanimous requirement. "I think this would be the death blow to the death penalty in Florida, when one juror would have the ability to stop the death penalty from being imposed," Tallahassee State Attorney Willie Meggs said. The prosecutors listed about a dozen murderers who did not receive a unanimous jury recommendation for death, including Ted Bundy and Aileen Wuornos. Jerry Blair, state attorney for a seven-county district between Tallahassee and Jacksonville, said, "If the legislature accepts the invitation of the Florida Supreme Court and tampers with Florida's death penalty statute, my fear is that we are going to open a Pandora's box that will ensure that our death penalty statute will continue to be litigated and re-litigated on constitutional issues and the death penalty in Florida will become even more of a hollow threat than it is at the current time." But others said the prosecutors are being misleading. In Florida death penalty cases, juries make one vote and report that back to the judge, said Larry Spalding of the ACLU of Florida. But in states where unanimous verdicts are required, the jurors continue voting until they reach a consensus, just as they do when deliberating about guilt or innocence. Because of that change, Spalding said a unanimous verdict requirement would in no way end the death penalty in Florida. "If that was true, we wouldn't see any death sentences coming out of Texas unanimous jury required," Spalding said. "We wouldn't see any death sentences coming out of California, out of Virginia, out of Georgia, where unanimous juries are required." Slow appeal process Prosecutors also said tinkering with the death penalty law would further slow down the appeal process, which already takes years to resolve. All death sentence cases are appealed automatically to the Florida Supreme Court and prosecutors said changing the laws now would complicate the entire process. But Michael Radelet, a professor and chairman of the sociology department at the University of Colorado, said the opposite would be true. Radelet studied Florida's death penalty system as a University of Florida professor for 2 decades and said much of the reason for the delays in appeals is because people can be sent to death with a 7-5, 8-4 or 9-5 vote. In those cases, death row inmates can offer strong appeals, arguing that only 1 or 2 votes could have swayed the decision. In fact, Radelet said judges have ordered death sentences 60 times in the past 30 years, despite a jury's recommendation for a life sentence. The Florida Supreme Court overturned most of the cases, but 4 inmates were executed. Those weaker execution cases serve as the "sand in the executioner's gas tank," a lag in the system that would disappear if all cases were unanimous, Radelet said. "What is keeping those people alive who had unanimous jury recommendations for death is that the court has to spend an equal amount of time on cases where there were only 7 or 8 or 9 votes for death," he said. "So what happens, in a funny sort of way, is that if we wanted more executions, we'd be sentencing fewer people to death." Rep. Jack Seiler, D-Wilton Manors and the House sponsor of the bill, concedes that fewer people would be sentenced to death under a system that required a unanimous verdict. But Seiler, a death penalty proponent like Senate sponsor Sen. Alex Villalobos, R-Miami, would prefer that system if it meant that those who are ordered to death are sent through a proper, constitutional system. "Why are we the only state like this?" Seiler said. "Does that mean that maybe we're not constitutionally sound? I don't know. But I don't want further doubt in the area of capital punishment. I don't want capital punishment tossed out or abolished in Florida because we're not doing things correctly. That's why we're doing this." (source: Palm Beach Post) USA----federal death row inmate seeks to drop appeals Death row inmate gives up appeal in Conway kidnapping, slaying Convicted murderer and death row inmate Chadrick Fulks is asking for his appeals to be dropped and for his execution date to be set. Fulks also is offering to help authorities the body of Alice Donovan of Galivants Ferry, who he and Branden Basham are convicted of killing more than 3 years ago. Fulks, 28, and Basham, 23, were convicted in separate federal trials of kidnapping Donovan, 44, from a Wal-Mart parking lot in Conway in November 2002, then raping and killing her. Fulks received the 1st federal death penalty verdict in South Carolina. Basham later was sentenced to death as well. The 2 also pleaded guilty in connection with the abduction and slaying of 19-year-old Marshall University student Samantha Burns of West Virginia and were sentenced to life in prison last summer. Neither womans body has been found, but Fulks and Basham have said both women are dead. Even though Fulks went with law enforcement officers to find Donovans body before, he said he wants to try again. (source: Morning News) SOUTH DAKOTA: Death row inmate asks for a rehearing The lawyer for death row inmate Briley Piper wants the state Supreme Court to review its decision on his sentence in light of a letter said to be written by a co-defendant who also was sentenced to death. "This letter constitutes newly discovered evidence, which we hope will be considered at some point, and which was unavailable to us until just this week," lawyer Timothy Rensch said. Piper and Elijah Page both pleaded guilty to 1st-degree murder in the beating and torture death of Chester Poage, of Spearfish, in March 2000. Both were sentenced by the judge to death. The South Dakota Supreme Court last month upheld the death sentences in a 3-2 decision. A 3rd defendant, Darrell Hoadley, was convicted by a jury of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. A letter purportedly written by Page was mailed from the state penitentiary to attorneys and government officials around the state. A copy of the letter was mailed from the penitentiary to the Argus Leader of Sioux Falls. It says Page is ending his appeals and alleges Piper was not as involved in the crime as prosecutors claimed. "It was Darryl's (sic) and my idea to kill (Poage). Piper really wanted nothing to do with it all, but if Darryl and I (were) in it, we weren't going to let Piper be out of it," the letter states. "To manipulate Piper was easy. I simply told him that if he didn't go along with what he was told, I was going to shoot him, and then after that, I was going to shoot his sister." Page's lawyer, Mike Butler of Sioux Falls, declined to comment on the contents of the letter. "I am aware of the letter," Butler said. "It's my understanding that (Page) wrote the letter." Attorneys for Page and Piper had argued to the Supreme Court that the death penalty was too severe, given that Hoadley received a life sentence. The court said the punishment is appropriate because the 2 men were the most violent participants. According to court documents, the three men beat and stabbed Poage before dragging him to a gulch in the Black Hills. In the snow, they removed his clothes and continued to kick and beat him in an icy creek. After attempts to drown him, they dropped large rocks on his head. "It is a pretty unusual situation," Attorney General Larry Long said of the letter and request for a rehearing. "What the court may just say is this is too late. You should have gone to trial and called this guy as a witness." An argument filed by Rensch on Friday says there are compelling reasons for the court to review the case because it involves life or death. "I think in matters of life or death, we need to pay attention to every little detail," Rensch said. "That's what's demanded in the situation." Page did not file a petition for rehearing, but his appeal options are not exhausted, Butler said. (source: Associated Press)
