March 21 NEW YORK: Clemency for Death Row Inmates to be Discussed Contact----John DellaContrada dellacon at buffalo.edu 716-645-5000 ext 1409 Lawyers involved in four highly publicized death-row cases, including the clemency plea of Stanley "Tookie" Williams, will participate in a panel discussion on "Executive Clemency in Capital Cases," organized by the Capital Advocacy Project in the University at Buffalo Law School. To be held at 5:30 p.m. on March 27 in 106 O'Brian Hall on UB's North (Amherst) Campus, the discussion is free and open to the public. To register, send an email to ublaw.cap at gmail.com. Panelists will include: * Defense attorney Jonathan Harris, who represented death-row inmate Stanley "Tookie" Williams in California. Williams, the former Crips gang leader, was denied clemency and executed in 2005, despite pleas from supporters who said he presented a compelling portrait of redemption and rehabilitation. * Defense attorney Sarah Nagy, who in 2005 won clemency for Arthur Baird, a mentally ill death-row inmate in Indiana. Baird was granted clemency just 36 hours before his scheduled execution. * Cornell University Associate Law Professor John Blume, who recently argued a case before the Supreme Court involving South Carolina death-row inmate Bobby Lee Holmes. In his criminal trial, Holmes was prevented from presenting evidence that a third party committed the crime for which he was convicted, although forensic evidence implicated Holmes. * Connecticut attorney Harry Weller, who prosecuted confessed serial killer Michael Ross. Ross was executed in 2005 after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected last-minute appeals from his relatives. UB Associate Law Professor Teresa Miller will moderate the discussion. The panel discussion is intended to raise awareness about various defects in the capital punishment system, according to third-year UB law student Jenny Mills, founder and co-president of the Capital Advocacy Project. "Clemency rarely ever is granted, even in cases where there is a clear argument for clemency," says Mills, who last summer worked with death row inmates in Kentucky and created clemency materials for one inmate nearing his execution date. "Because of the way the justice system is structured, inmates traditionally are barred from raising various claims during their appeals and post-conviction proceedings," she adds. "The clemency process is thus the only time they can raise certain issues, but it would appear that most clemency petitions are dismissed out of hand." According to Mills, the goal of the Capital Advocacy Project is to bring awareness about the death penalty to fellow law students and the UB community. Project members focus on legal issues in the debate over capital punishment and are working on a research project involving aggravating factors in capital cases. When completed, the research will be disseminated to capital defense lawyers around the country. (source: University at Buffalo - the State University of New York) NEW JERSEY: Prosecutors ponder retrial of Marshall----Courts: Death sentence invalid The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday said it will not hear an appeal of a lower court ruling that invalidated the death penalty for Robert O. Marshall, convicted in the contract killing of his wife, Maria, in 1984. The top court's decision not to hear the appeal means the former Dover Township insurance salesman, now 66, is off death row permanently, unless the state convinces a new jury that he should die for hiring a hit man to kill the 42-year-old mother of his three children. The case was the subject of a bestselling book and television miniseries. The state now has 120 days to retry the death-penalty phase of the case, according to a U.S. District Court judge's ruling in 2004 that was put on hold pending a conclusion to the appeals process. If the state chooses not to retry the penalty phase, it would stipulate a life prison term for Marshall. In that event, Marshall would be eligible to apply for parole in 2014, after having been incarcerated for 30 years, said Tom Rosenthal, a spokesman for the state Public Defender's Office, which has represented Marshall in a long series of appeals. Ocean County Prosecutor Thomas F. Kelaher said Monday he plans to meet with staff from the state Attorney General's Office to decide how to proceed and whether any retrial should be moved out of Ocean County. The first trial in 1986 was held in Atlantic County because of pretrial publicity. In a retrial of the penalty phase, a jury would be asked if Marshall should be put to death by lethal injection. Insurance called motive In the first trial, the jury found Marshall guilty of hiring someone to shoot his wife during a faked robbery at a staged breakdown of the couple's car on Sept. 7, 1984. The location was at the now-closed Oyster Creek picnic area on the Garden State Parkway in Lacey. The prosecution had argued that Marshall - at the time a prominent member of the Dover Township country-club set - arranged the killing so he could collect $1.4 million in life insurance and continue an extramarital affair. The death-penalty phase occurred during a whirlwind of excitement the same day the jury convicted Marshall. The jury ordered a death sentence soon after the attorneys summed up their arguments in the penalty phase. The Public Defender's Office appealed, saying Marshall received ineffective assistance from his trial attorney, Glenn Zeitz, who called no witnesses to ask the jury to spare Marshall's life. U.S. District Judge Joseph E. Irenas agreed and overturned Marshall's death sentence in a 2004 ruling. Irenas' ruling was upheld in November by the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. The state Attorney General's Office sought to appeal the ruling to the nation's highest court, saying that Zeitz did not act ineffectively on Marshall's behalf but instead made a strategic decision not to present witnesses during the death-penalty phase of the trial. Until Irenas' ruling, Marshall had been on death row longer than any other inmate since New Jersey reinstated the death penalty in 1982. Kelaher has supported abolishing the death penalty in favor of life in prison with no parole for certain murderers. Kelaher said he has taken that position because the state has not put anyone to death in the more than 23 years since capital punishment was reinstated. But on Monday, Kelaher did not rule out making one last attempt to put Marshall to death. Reactions to the news Kelaher said he was not surprised the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal, noting there was no major constitutional issue in question in the case. But Peter Aseltine, a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office, said his office "had thought the district court's opinion was contrary to (Supreme Court precedents) on the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel." Rosenthal, of the Public Defender's Office, was cautious about commenting on Monday's decision. "We're awaiting the Ocean County prosecutor's decision as to what they will do next," he said. "The ball is in their court. . . . This matter isn't over yet." As is its typical practice, the Supreme Court did not say why it declined to hear the appeal. Marshall remains the only person incarcerated in the case. In one of his last acts in office in January, Gov. Richard J. Codey commuted the 30-year sentence of a nearly blind hardware-store clerk, Robert Cumber, 68, of Shreveport, La., who was convicted as an accomplice for what the former governor said was allowing one of the murder conspirators to use his phone. The alleged hit man, Larry N. Thompson of Fairview-Alpha, La., stood trial with Marshall and was acquitted of the murder. Another defendant, Billy Wayne McKinnon of Greenwood, La., pleaded guilty to his part in the murder conspiracy and agreed to testify against the others. He received a five-year prison term and was paroled after serving a year. The Marshall case was the subject of the Joe McGinniss bestseller "Blind Faith" and a subsequent television miniseries based on the book. (source: Asbury Park Press) ARIZONA: Argument for the death penalty The death penalty is handed out arbitrarily, affects the poor disproportionately, shows no effectiveness as a crime deterrent and is meted out so slowly it can hardly be called justice. Still, the case arguments are a lot of fun. The Supreme Court holds an argument this morning at the Arizona State University College of Law. The case involves 2 German citizens named Michael and Rudi Apelt. The 2 were convicted of brutally killing a woman in 1988 and leaving her body in the desert in Apache Junction. Michael Apelt, court records say, courted the woman for three weeks before their Vegas wedding. He took out a $400,000 life insurance policy and the murder was part of a plot to cash in, records show. The case has become big news in Germany, where visions of Arizona as the Wild West fill newspapers and television. But the main court battle has been over whether Rudi Apelt is mentally competent. His lawyers have medical evidence showing an IQ below the level considered retarded. Prosecutors say hes faking. Argument begins at 10:30 a.m. Real-life legal drama at its finest. (source: Arizona Republic) SOUTH CAROLINA: Darlington County prosecutors to seek death penalty in death of grocery store owner Prosecutors in Darlington County say they will seek a death sentence if a man is convicted of killing a grocery store owner in 2004. Anthony Robinson is accused of killing 70-year-old Richard Griggs at the store he had owned for nearly 50 years. Griggs was shot several times during a robbery in September, 2004. Robinson pleaded not guilty Monday. Neither Robinson nor his court-appointed attorney, Jim Hoffmeyer, had a comment. Robinson, Dennis Hunter and a 15-year-old boy from Society Hill were charged with murder, conspiracy and possession of a weapon during a violent crime. Hunter was 17 at the time of the crime. Neither he nor the 15-year-old is eligible for a death sentence. (source: Associated Press) FLORIDA: U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear guard killer's appeal The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to consider an appeal of one of Florida's most notorious death-row inmates, ending his attempt to prove through DNA testing that he was not the gunman in a 1987 shooting death of a corrections officer. William Van Poyck, 51, and co-defendant Frank Valdes were sent to death row for murdering Fred Griffis in 1987 while trying to free another inmate from a prison van in West Palm Beach. Van Poyck has taken responsibility for the slaying but denied he was the triggerman. The court's refusal means a 2005 decision by the Florida Supreme Court stands. It concluded "there is no reasonable probability that Van Poyck would have received a lesser sentence had DNA evidence establishing that he was not the triggerman been presented at trial." Jeffrey O. Davis, one of Van Poyck's lawyers, said he was disappointed by the decision. "This is a real injustice. Hopefully, we can find a court that will look at it and agree with us," said Davis, a Milwaukee attorney. "All Mr. Van Poyck would like would be to have the fact-finder to know the true facts." The high court's refusal to hear the case means "he is at the end of the road" in his appeals, said Carolyn Snurkowski, a death penalty appeals lawyer for state Attorney General Charlie Crist. However, executions are on hold until the court hears the appeal of Clarence Hill, who is challenging the procedure for lethal injection practices. Van Poyck and Valdes were free on June 24, 1987, when they ambushed two guards who were taking inmate James O'Brien in a prison van to a doctor's office in West Palm Beach. Griffis was shot 3 times. Van Poyck and Valdes were unable to free O'Brien and were arrested a short time later when Valdes lost control of the Cadillac he was driving and struck a tree. In 2003, Van Poyck wrote an autobiography, "A Checkered Past: A Memoir." The book detailed a downward spiral that began as a child burglar and ended with his condemnation for the murder. "I've squandered away my entire life, thrown away everything I might have been," Van Poyck wrote. In 1999, guards at Florida State Prison stomped Valdes to death, but no one was convicted in 2 trials. Prison officials then sent Van Poyck to Sussex State Prison in Virginia for his own protection. He is still being held there. That's where he wrote the 324-page book. The central theme is his newfound belief in God, which he said came to him when he was on the verge of suicide. "There are many questions I cannot answer, but one thing I know for certain: an innocent man is dead for no good reason, and ultimately, I'm responsible," he wrote. (source: Associated Press)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.Y., N.J., ARIZ., S.C., FLA.
Rick Halperin Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:41:40 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
