[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CALIF., NEV., OHIO, FLA., KY.

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 20


CALIFORNIA:

Trial date set for Stockton man facing death penalty


A June 5 trial date was set today for William Jennings Choyce, a trash
hauler from Stockton facing the death penalty on charges he bound, raped
and murdered 3 prostitutes nearly a decade ago.

Choyce, 52, had been serving an 11-year state prison sentence for a 2002
conviction for raping 2 Oakland women. Investigators last year used DNA
evidence to link Choyce to the slayings of 2 Stockton women and another
from Oakland.

He is accused in the deaths of Gwen Lee and Lawanda Beck, both of
Stockton, about 1 month apart in 1997. In 1988, Oakland police found
Vic-toria Bell dead, and they accuse Choyce of killing her.

The women were found dumped, each with a gunshot to the head, according to
records.

"It's clear you are seeking the death penalty in this case," San Joaquin
County Superior Court Judge Linda L. Lofthus said to the prosecutor,
seeking confirmation.

"Yes," San Joaquin County Deputy District Attorney Thomas Testa replied.

San Joaquin County Deputy Public Defender William Fattarsi and private
Oakland attorney Lorna Brown are representing Choyce, who has been held at
the San Joaquin County Jail since the new charges were filed against him.
His 1st court appearance in this county was in March.

(source: Stockton Record)

*****************

Judge Discusses Goals For Hearing On Executions


The federal judge who effectively halted executions in California earlier
this year laid out his goals Wednesday for a 4-day hearing later this
month on the constitutionality of the state's death penalty procedure.

U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel told attorneys representing
condemned inmate Michael Morales and the State of California that at the
conclusion of the hearing he hopes to determine whether "there is or there
is not a constitutional means of carrying out an execution in the State of
California."

In February, the scheduled execution of Morales, and effectively all other
executions in California, was postponed indefinitely after state prison
officials were unable to comply with Fogel's order that a "qualified
individual" licensed by the state to administer drugs intravenously be
present in the execution chamber during the execution and participate in
the lethal injection procedure. All of the "qualified individuals," prison
officials approached refused to participate in the execution on ethical
grounds.

Attorneys for Morales have argued that California's lethal injection
procedure is unconstitutional because there is a possibility that the
condemned prisoner may experience excruciating pain, in violation of the
Eighth Amendment prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment," as
the lethal drugs are being administered.

In March, Fogel spent several hours touring California's execution chamber
at San Quentin State Prison and hearing testimony from members of the
execution team. At the 4-day hearing scheduled to begin on Sept. 26 he
will hear from experts from both sides about the California execution
procedure.

(source: KTVU)






NEVADA:

3 Changes Ordered in Oversight of Nevada Judges----The state's chief
justice announces immediate actions to curb conflicts of interest and
other improprieties raised in reports by The Times.


The chief justice of the Nevada Supreme Court has ordered 3 steps to
heighten scrutiny and supervision of the state's judges, who have become
the target of a reform effort amid allegations of impropriety and cronyism
in the courtroom and on the campaign trail.

The changes were disclosed in a 4-page statement sent to the Los Angeles
Times by Chief Justice Robert E. Rose, Nevada's former lieutenant governor
and an important figure in the state's political landscape.

They come in the wake of a Times investigation into the state's judiciary,
especially the Las Vegas bench. The investigation determined, among other
things, that Nevada judges have awarded millions of dollars in judgments
in recent years without disclosing that the money was awarded to friends,
business partners and former clients - even people to whom the judges owed
money.

The Times' stories had already triggered a broader effort designed to
separate Nevada judges from campaign contributors and reduce the frequency
of costly elections that judges face under current state law.

Rose's statement outlined 3 additional steps toward reform that will be
set in motion immediately.

First, the Supreme Court will implement a formal process to evaluate the
performance of the state's senior judges - on-call jurists who are paid by
the hour, have typically retired from the bench and are farmed out to
assist with a growing workload in the court system.

Although many had distinguished careers before their retirement, they are
seen as vulnerable to allegations of impropriety because they are not
accountable to voters and serve at the pleasure of the Supreme Court
indefinitely.

The Times investigation found, for instance, that one senior judge ruled
repeatedly in favor of a casino corporation in which he held more than
10,000 shares, and that another had presided over at least 16 cases
involving participants in his real estate deals.

One senior judge scrutinized in the Times' stories, Joseph S. Pavlikowski,
has resigned from the position in the wake of the reports, Rose said.

The chief justice said Nevada would benefit from a "more comprehensive and
uniform procedure to evaluate the performance of our senior judges."

Starting in November, evaluation forms will be sent to lawyers, jurors and
parties in cases that are heard by senior judges, and the district courts
that request the judges' services.

Second, Rose said, senior judges will be subjected in some cases to
peremptory challenge - the right of a party in a court case to seek a
judge's removal. Currently, senior judges are immune from such challenges,
unlike regular judges.

In the past, Rose said, senior judges were not exposed to challenges
because they were often pressed into service at the last moment; they are
often called to preside over a case when another judge is sick or
otherwise absent.

Now, peremptory challenges will be allowed when a senior judge is
appointed more than 14 days prior to a scheduled court date, Rose said.

Third, Rose said, the Supreme Court will issue a communique to all of the
state's district court judges reminding them of their ethical obligation
to disclose potential conflicts of interest.

The Times investigation detailed a host of instances in which judges
presided over cases in which their impartiality could have been called
into question.

"Detailed facts were not provided to support many of the accusations,"
Rose wrote. "But, suffice it to say, there were instances where the
disclosure of an interest or facts that may bear upon the case should have
been made by the judge."

According to federal and state judicial canons, judges should withdraw
from cases when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. But the
state does not require judges to disclose when their campaign contributors
appear before them. And court observers say some judges have been reticent
in volunteering information that might call their impartiality into
question.

Rose said he would remind judges that they should "err on the side of
disclosure."

"We believe that judges often equate a disqualifying interest with an
interest they are required to disclose," Rose wrote. "Such is not the
case. A judge must disqualify himself or herself from any case where his
or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Rose sent his statement to The Times on Monday night. He did not return
phone calls on Tuesday seeking additional comment.

The state's top judge said he found insufficient grounds to act against
three senior judges whose conduct was called into question by The Times
investigation, citing inadequate information or lack of jurisdiction.

The Times reported that Pavlikowski, the senior judge who recently
resigned, officiated at the wedding of Frank "Lefty" Rosenthal in 1969,
when Rosenthal was known as a frontman for the Chicago mob. Pavlikowski
then accepted a discounted wedding reception for his daughter at a casino
where Rosenthal was a top executive. The judge later ruled in favor of
Rosenthal in 3 cases.

But because Pavlikowski resigned his judgeship, "apparently to pursue
other career endeavors," Rose wrote, "it is unnecessary to review the
allegations against him."

Rose noted that whereas the state Supreme Court appoints senior judges and
can withdraw their commission, the court's jurisdiction over the judges is
limited. The responsibility of investigating complaints made by the public
against senior judges falls in most cases to the state's Commission on
Judicial Discipline.

The commission's general counsel and executive director, David F.
Sarnowski, said Tuesday that he was prohibited from disclosing whether any
complaints have been lodged against the judges. But the commission has not
publicly announced any action against the judges - James A. Brennan,
Stephen L. Huffaker and Pavlikowski.

Washoe County District Judge Brent Adams, a leading proponent of judicial
reform in Nevada, commended Rose in an interview Tuesday for issuing a
reminder that judges are obligated to reveal conflicts of interest.

But he noted that it was the Supreme Court that determined that Nevada
judges are not required to disclose when a party in a case has contributed
to their election campaign. He said the Supreme Court could have a more
lasting effect on the judiciary by revisiting that "terrible decision."

"It's encouraging to be reminded that we can always behave above the
minimum standard," he said. "But it would be marvelous if the Nevada
Supreme Court, for once, would raise the standard."

(source: Los Angeles Times)






OHIO:

Defense questions evidence collection in death penalty case----Middletown
man accused of aggravated murder on trial before 3-judge panel.


Defense attorneys for accused killer Dean Geldrich attacked the
credibility of crime scene investigators who collected evidence from the
Malvern Street house where Miranda Lint was killed in January, claiming
they entered the Middletown home before obtaining a search warrant and
then altered the time on the police evidence log to cover it up.

Testimony continued Tuesday in day 2 of the death penalty trial of
Geldrich, who stands accused of brutally beating the 28-year-old Lint with
a walking stick and cutting her more than 20 times with a knife.

Prosecutors seemed to score a victory Monday with the three-judge panel
presiding over the case with potentially damaging testimony from a witness
who overheard the gruesome crime as it was taking place. But it was
defense attorneys who went on the offensive Tuesday with a rigorous
cross-examination of police that called into question how investigators
gathered 40 pieces of evidence at the crime scene Jan. 3, two days after
Lint was killed.

During day one testimony, Middletown police Detective David Shortt
identified photographs of Lint's blood-soaked body, massive blood spatter
on the walls, blood-covered items surrounding the bed where she was
terrorized for hours and the blanket her body was wrapped in when police
found her.

But during cross-examination Tuesday, defense attorney Melynda Cook-Reich
questioned Shortt about when officers entered the house and began taking
evidence from the crime scene.

Shortt said he got to the house about 5 p.m., but did not enter until 9:05
p.m. when he received a phone call from Detective Frank Hensley that he
received a search warrant from Middletown Municipal Court Judge Mark Wall.

Cook-Reich then pointed to an evidence log attached to the search warrant,
which was returned to the court 3 days after it was issued. The log states
the start time of the search as 5:45 p.m., Cook-Reich said, and it doesn't
match a version of the document provided later to the defense, which
listed a 9:06 p.m. start time.

In a pretrial hearing, Shortt testified he entered the house and began
collecting evidence at 9:35 p.m., Cook-Reich pointed out to Shortt. The
detective said he had been mistaken in the previous hearing, that actual
time was 9:05 p.m.

Cook-Reich asked if he changed the start time on the second log to "make
sure the start time is actually after 8:54 p.m. when Judge Wall signed the
search warrant."

Shortt said "no" explaining the first report was a work in progress taken
from his raw notes. He continued to revise and edit the document for weeks
during the investigation checking his facts until the final version was
completed.

A photo of a clock taken in the kitchen of the Malvern Street home and
identified by Shortt during testimony Monday also was a subject of
questioning by Cook-Reich, noting if no officers entered the house to
begin an investigation before 9:05 p.m. then why does the clock depict the
time as 8:02 p.m.

"An officer did enter with the coroner. Stood in the kitchen entrance and
took shots to make sure evidence was not disturbed," Shortt said, adding
that no evidence was taken and investigation did not begin at that time.

Shortt said a person can only officially be declared dead by a
representative of the Butler County Coroner's Office, and he has no power
to tell the coroner not to check the body.

"The officer was there to protect the integrity of the crime scene, to
make sure nothing was stepped on or moved," Shortt said.

Assistant Prosecutor Craig Hedric asked Shortt, "Did you change anything
based on when a search warrant was obtained?"

"Absolutely not," Short said.

Hensley, who also interviewed Geldrich about the murder at 611 1/2 Malvern
St., testified the defendant gave different versions of what happened to
Lint during interviews Jan. 3 and Jan. 6.

In the first interview, when Hensley asked Geldrich who killed Lint, his
reply was "if a farmer has carrots growing in the garden then you could
say that the farmer planted them," the detective said during testimony.
Geldrich later told him the carrots were an analogy for Lint's body.

On Jan. 6, Geldrich first said he was at the residence when Lint was
killed but did not do it. He said he was forced to wrap the dead body in a
blanket by two other men who had killed her, Hensley said.

Later in the interview, Hensley said Geldrich told them he had acted
alone.

"(Geldrich) said I don't know why I did it," Hensley said.

Annette Davis, a forensic scientist with the Butler County Crime
Laboratory, testified that blood found on numerous items taken from the
crime scene, including Geldrich's jeans, tested positive for Lint's DNA.

The trial is scheduled to continue today and Thursday. Geldrich, 40, is
charged with aggravated murder and 2 counts of kidnapping. If found
guilty, the penalty phase, in which he faces death, will begin Monday.

(source: Middletown Journal)






FLORIDA:

Death equity----Report casts new light on executions


Many Floridians have good reasons for supporting capital punishment, while
many others reject it out of hand. But one point on which most would agree
is that this ultimate power of the state should be carried out with utmost
care and fairness. To put to death an innocent person is as criminal as
the killings that those who reside on Florida's death row carried out
without conscience.

As Floridians awaited today's scheduled execution of Clarence Hill, who
shot to death Pensacola police officer Stephen Taylor during a 1982 bank
robbery, a report emanating from 2 years of study by an American Bar
Association committee was released for public consideration.

It offers our state a more sure-footed way to carry out this punishment
with confidence that the process is fair and accurate and minimizes the
risk of executing innocent people.

The numbers offer ample evidence of how high that risk is: Florida has
released more people from its death row than any other state - 22
exonerated since 1973 - with 392 Florida inmates still awaiting execution.
Nationwide, 123 have been released from death rows after evidence proved
their innocence.

The 8-member committee, which includes two Tallahasseeans - retired
Florida Supreme Court Justice Leander J. Shaw Jr. and Florida State
University faculty member Mark Schlakman, an attorney who directs the
Center for the Advancement of Human Rights at FSU - set out not to support
or oppose the death penalty. Its goal was to identify issues and problems
that should be addressed, from the assurance of competent legal
representation to changing clemency rules.

Florida is the 4th state that the ABA has worked with in assessing capital
punishment, and the recommendations here and elsewhere don't constitute
ABA policy. The ABA in 1997 called for a death-penalty moratorium so that
states could identify the recurring issues that should be addressed and
minimized. These range from creating ways to prevent wrongful convictions
to reviewing in orderly ways factual claims of innocence, studying racial
disparities and deciding what crimes should be eligible for the death
penalty.

Supporters of the death penalty such as State Attorney Harry Shorstein of
Jacksonville, a committee member, want to counter criticism of capital
punishment by administering it fairly and equitably instead of unevenly
and ineffectively.

The revelation in recent years of the importance of DNA testing, for
example, has perhaps done more than anything to open the public's eyes to
the unevenness of this punishment. Otherwise it has largely been an
emotional, often spiritual debate, one expressing values ranging from
mercy to vengeance and covering all manner of legal, financial and
practical concerns.

This 462-page Florida evaluation, along with those done in other states,
is largely administrative for the ABA, but it provides the underpinnings
for more dispassionate, informed and practical discussions among
policymakers, citizens, lawyers and civil-rights organizations.

Florida lawmakers, when they reconvene after the elections, would do well
to appoint special committees to scrupulously review this important
document. They need to see what applications are important and changes
necessary to make the law we have in Florida the best one we can have if,
in fact, the majority of Floridians continues to support it as our best
way of holding criminals accountable.

(source: Tallahassee Democrat)

**************

Saved from execution once, killer is facing death again


A condemned killer who got a last-second reprieve before he was to be
executed earlier this year is scheduled to die by lethal injection today.

Clarence Hill, the condemned cop-killer who won a last-second reprieve
while strapped to his death gurney earlier this year, is again set to die,
this time at 6 tonight at Florida State Prison in Starke.

Saying lethal injection is cruelly painful, Hill has appealed his case
again to the U.S. Supreme Court, which stopped his execution in January
just before the prison staff was to inject him with a lethal 3-drug
cocktail.

The court ruled unanimously in June that Hill had the right to file a
civil rights action against the state's method of lethal injection, and
sent the case back to lower courts to hear his argument. But a federal
court in Gainesville and an appeals court have ruled against him -- and
Gov. Jeb Bush said it's time for Hill to die.

''Mr. Hill has had ample time to go through the process to the point
where, at least I believe, there's a mockery made of the judicial
system,'' Bush said. "It was cruel and unusual what he did. He was
convicted by a jury of his peers. And it's gone on and on and on and on.
My first thought is for the families of the victims of these crimes.''

But Hill's attorney, Todd Doss, said Hill could suffer pain if he has not
been properly anesthetized with Pentothal Sodium before 2 other drugs that
stop the heart -- pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride -- are
administered.

LEGAL STANDARDS

Hill's scheduled execution comes just days after the American Bar
Association released an exhaustive 403-page report that said Florida --
which leads the nation in exonerations from Death Row, with 22 since 1973
-- complies with only eight of 93 ABA legal standards. The ABA takes no
position on the death penalty itself, but called for a moratorium on
executions in 1997 so that legal questions could be worked out.

Of the 11 recommendations the ABA report's experts made this time: make
Florida juries, like those in the 37 other death-penalty states, recommend
executions by a unanimous vote, instead of by a simple majority. The
Florida Supreme Court suggested the change, but the Republican-controlled
Legislature killed it this year, with many lawmakers expressing concerns
that it was a ''soft on crime'' approach.

Bush had expressed similar sentiments, but seemed to reverse himself
Tuesday when he said the matter should be considered.

''When the Supreme Court sends a signal like that, it should not be just
cast aside, because ultimately they will have some say in how the death
penalty works,'' said Bush, who ordered a review of Florida's
death-penalty system after Hill won his appeal in January.

The governor wouldn't comment on specifics of the ABA report, which he
said his office is still reviewing. But Bush did call for a speedier
execution system, which the ABA did not recommend.

''I believe the death-penalty process here is protected, correctly so, by
an appeals process that is extensive. It can go on for more than 10 years.
For a lot of people, that's denial of justice. And if there is any
revamping, I would like to see it far quicker,'' Bush said.

The report specifically called for qualified lawyers for capital-case
defendants; a ban on executions of the mentally disabled; the creation of
uniform statewide standards to decide who is charged with a capital crime;
and a commission to study Florida's wrongful convictions to prevent the
execution of the innocent.

Also, it noted racial disparities in the justice system. ''It appears that
those convicted of killing white victims are far more likely to receive a
death sentence and be executed than those convicted of killing nonwhite
victims,'' it said.

1982 ROBBERY

Hill is black. Stephen Taylor, the Pensacola police officer he killed, was
white.

In October 1982, Hill and an accomplice, Cliff Jackson, robbed a savings
and loan in Pensacola. Police arrived during the robbery and were trying
to handcuff Jackson when Hill shot 2 police officers, killing Taylor and
wounding Officer Larry Bailly.

Bailly managed to shoot Hill several times. Hill was captured shortly
after.

The ABA report didn't concern itself with the specific matter Hill has
raised on appeal: the possible pain from the heart-stopper mixed with a
diluted dose of anesthetic. Most doctors refuse to perform the
lethal-injection procedure, saying it violates their professional oath to
do no harm.

Though experts say the amount of anesthetic Hill will get is enough to
knock out a horse, a person without a medical degree could perform the
procedure and fail to stick the intravenous tube in correctly, or
improperly mix the fatal cocktail, Dr. Nik Gravenstein, chairman of the
University of Florida College of Medicine's anesthesia department, told
The Associated Press.

''There are myriad opportunities for errors,'' he said.

(source: Miami Herald)






KENTUCKY:

Man gets death sentence in 1993 slayings


A jury recommended a death sentence for a south-central Kentucky man
convicted in the 1993 slayings of a family.

William Harry Meece, 33, was scheduled for final sentencing on Oct. 20.

A jury found Meece guilty on Friday of murder, robbery and burglary in the
deaths of veterinarian Joseph Wellnitz, 50, his wife, Beth, 40, and their
son, Dennis, 20, at a farmhouse outside Columbia in Adair County in
February 1993.

The jury also recommended 40 years in prison for Meece for the burglary
and robbery charges.

Prosecutors said Meece and the Wellnitz's surviving daughter, Margaret
"Meg" Wellnitz Appleton, contrived the murder plot to collect a $550,000
inheritance after the slayings.

Appleton pleaded guilty in January 2005 to 3 counts of complicity to
murder and testified against Meece.

Meece initially pleaded guilty to the slayings, but withdrew the plea in
May 2005.

The case lingered for a decade without suspects before police received a
tip that Meece and Appleton had talked about being involved in the
killings.

Vincent Yustas, one of Meeces attorneys, said he would appeal.

If the judge sentences Meece to death, he will become the 37th inmate on
Kentucky's death row.

(source: Associated Press)