Feb. 17 NORTH CAROLINA: Plan riles death row Attorneys for 2 death row inmates have moved the death penalty debate from one obscure state agency to another by filing a petition with the N.C. Office of Administrative Hearings. The inmates filed a lawsuit challenging the Council of State's approval of prison officials' plan to have a doctor monitor an inmate's "essential body functions" during an execution. That plan appears to violate the N.C. Medical Board's ethics policy that forbids doctors from participating in an execution in any way beyond being present. That conflict has already derailed 3 scheduled executions and may halt 2 more scheduled in March. Last month, a Wake County judge sent the issue to Gov. Mike Easley and the council, citing a little-known requirement in state law for those leaders to approve the qualified personnel involved in lethal injections. Once Easley and the council approved prison officials' proposal, many expected the issue would end up back in Wake Superior Court. However, attorneys for death row inmates James Campbell and Jerry Conner decided to file a petition with the administrative body that typically hears appeals of fines levied by state agencies or challenges to rules created by such agencies. The latter is what the inmates are claiming -- that essentially the council didn't abide by its own rules when passing this new rule. A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office could not be reached for comment late Friday. Inmates' assertions Raleigh lawyer Hardy Lewis, who represents the inmates, said the council failed to give proper notice of its Feb. 6 hearing and allow public comment on the proposal beforehand. Instead, the council's agenda was made public 5 days before the hearing and an inmate's attorney was denied a request to speak. The council only heard from attorneys for the prison system. Lewis said the inmates claim the council didn't have the authority to "enlarge the scope" of a licensed professional. In the petition, the inmates contend the council did that by requiring doctors to do more than just be present at the execution. If the inmates win, Lewis said, "The judge would essentially recommend the Council of State do right what we've contended they've done wrong." Lewis said the council could agree and abide by what the administrative law judge recommends or appeal to Wake Superior Court. (source: News & Observer) ******************* 2 death row prisoners use new route to challenge executions 2 death row inmates have filed an unusual legal challenge to North Carolina's capital punishment system, arguing state leaders approved a rule governing executions without sufficient public input. The challenge stems from the action taken by the Council of State, a panel of the state's top government officials, in approving a proposed "execution protocol" that updated the state's procedures for putting an inmate to death. The council approved the new procedure after a judge halted three executions, saying the panel must sign off on any changes to the protocol. State correction officials had modified the protocol to change the role a doctor plays in the process after the state Medical Board threatened to punish any physician who takes part in an execution. But attorney Hardy Lewis, who represents inmates Jerry W. Conner and James A. Campbell, said state law requires that such proposals be published in the North Carolina Register for review and be discussed at a public hearing. Only then can the council vote on approving the proposal, he said. "We have a lot to say about this rule and a lot to say about the way the protocol was put together," Lewis said. "There are limits on what an agency can do." Lewis said the challenge, filed through the state Office of Administrative Hearings, will be considered by an administrative law judge. Even though the council approved the new protocol, Attorney General Roy Cooper has said he would try to negotiate a compromise with the state medical board before trying to reschedule the postponed executions. Gov. Mike Easley has said the board's ruling has effectively placed a moratorium on the death penalty in North Carolina. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: The man who raped and murdered an 8-year ... The man who raped and murdered an 8-year-old San Pablo girl 27 years ago should be executed, a jury recommended Friday. Joseph Seferino Cordova, 62, did not budge from his desk in superior court in Martinez as the court clerk read the jury's decision. He looked straight ahead. "It was the right decision," said deputy district attorney Dara Cashman after the jury spent a day and a half deliberating. "There was no knee-jerk reaction." Cashman and jurors said that a death sentence was a formal gesture. They acknowledged that Cordova, with diabetes and hepatitis, will die of natural causes on death row before he is executed. Cordova said the same during his trial. Jurors left the courtroom immediately after Judge Peter Spinetta dismissed them. They exchanged hugs, some choking up as they spoke to one another in the hallway. The jury convicted the former Richmond man last month in the 1979 killing of Cannie Bullock. He denied committing the crime. Cannie's mother left her alone at home on Aug. 24, 1979 to go drinking at bars. She returned early the next morning to find her daughter's lifeless body beneath a blanket in the backyard. Decades passed without prosecutors charging anyone with the crime until 2002 when investigators matched sexual assault DNA from the crime scene to Cordova's. He was serving a prison sentence in Colorado for child molestation. The jury took about 3 hours to convict him in January. "Guilt was obvious," said juror Jim Crowson - the sole juror willing to speak about the case. "We knew before we walked in (to the deliberation room)." At trial, Cordova's attorney said the defendant had slept with Cannie's mother before the murder. Cordova left his sperm on the bedsheets, which may have been transferred to Cannie when she slept in the same sheets. "I thought that theory was a stretch, to be kind," Cashman said. Cordova's relatives testified that they believed in Cordova's innocence. His 1st ex-wife said after Friday's hearing that the wrong man was convicted. "I still don't believe he did it," said Lupe Snasel. Cordova had testified that he did not care whether he was sentenced to life without parole, or death row. He will die in prison either way, he told jurors. Crowson said he was one of the few jurors on the panel who had preferred to recommend life without parole. However, in Cordova's case, either sentence seemed the same because he will die before execution. "I'm opposed to the death penalty," Crowson said. "I didn't know I was. It was a revelation." If Spinetta confirms the jury's recommendation, Cordova will join 662 inmates awaiting execution in California. The state has executed 14 people since 1978. Cashman agreed that Cordova won't be executed but said death row is appropriate for him. "The death penalty is our ultimate penalty, whether it's a reality or not, it's the worst," she said after the hearing. "He needed to be labeled the worst of the worst. Whether (death) is imposed, that's secondary." (source: Contra Costa Times) ******************** Boy's killer gets death penalty----Family of 12-year-old condemn submachine-gun killer. A death sentence and a life prison term were handed down Friday to 2 men convicted of a submachine gun attack outside a South Los Angeles nightclub that killed a 12-year-old boy. A Superior Court judge sentenced Carlos Marvin Argueta, 21, to death and Enrique Gonzalez, 21, to life in prison without possibility of parole. Argueta was convicted of shooting and killing 24-year-old Jorge Lua, who was riding in a car on Valentine's Day 2004 in South Los Angeles, prosecutors said. The next day, he sprayed 21 bullets from a submachine gun at a group gathered in front of a local nightclub, killing 12-year-old Gregory Gabriel and injuring 2 other people, including a 13-year-old girl, authorities said. Argueta had been called to the nightclub by Gonzalez, authorities said. Argueta told investigators that he had fired into the air and didn't intend to hurt anyone, Deputy District Attorney Truc Do said. In court, the boy's sister, Charlene Myers, told Argueta that "you may have ended Gregory, my little brother's life, but not his legacy." "We will continue to make this world and these streets and our life, in his name, a better place," she said. "We will forever use his name to keep guys like you off the streets. Gregory John Gabriel will never be forgotten, unlike you." In October, Argueta was convicted of 2 counts of 1st-degree murder with special circumstances that made him eligible for the death penalty. He also was convicted of 7 counts of attempted murder for a later shooting rampage targeting people he thought had testified against his brother in an unrelated case. Jurors deadlocked over an eighth count. Gonzalez was convicted separately of the 12-year-old's killing but acquitted of the Lua killing. Argueta's attorney, Randy Short, acknowledged that Argueta fired the gun that killed the 12-year-old but said he was the driver and Gonzalez the gunman during the other shootings. (source: Long Beach Press-Telegram) ************************************* Judge says death penalty still in play----Suspect is accused of shooting an East Palo Alto police officer last year A San Mateo County Superior Court Judge declined Friday to strike down a potential capital punishment sentence for Alberto Alvarez, accused of killing an East Palo Alto police officer in 2006. Alvarez, 23, a reputed Sacramento Street gang member, is charged with 1st-degree murder with the special circumstance of killing 38-year-old Richard May in the line of duty and using a firearm. He is eligible for the death penalty or life in prison without parole, if convicted. Friday, Judge Robert Foiles dismissed a defense motion to strike a potential death penalty sentence for Alvarez. According to San Mateo County Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe, the District Attorney's Office has not yet decided whether it will seek the death penalty for Alvarez. Alvarez is accused of gunning down May around 4:30 p.m. Jan. 7, 2006, near Weeks Street and University Avenue. He allegedly fled after the shooting, but was arrested the next morning after officers found him suffering from a gunshot wound to the leg in the back of a car. Alvarez, who remains in custody on no-bail status, will return to court on March 2 for a hearing regarding a defense motion to permanently seal the grand jury transcript from his indictment in August. (source: Inside Bay Area News) ******************** Accused cop killer wants death penalty off table The Sacramento Street gang member accused of murdering an East Palo Alto police officer in front of a 16-year-old police explorer should not be charged with the special allegations that make him eligible for the death penalty if convicted, according to his defense team. Defense attorneys did not address whether Alberto Alvarez, 23, is guilty of gunning down Officer Richard May, 38, but are trying to minimize any potential punishment by changing the case into a straight question of murder. Special circumstances, such as the murder of a police officer, make a defendant eligible for the death penalty or life in prison without parole. District Attorney Jim Fox has yet to announce whether he will seek capital punishment for Alvarez. On Friday, his attorneys filed a motion to strike the special circumstances. The matter will be heard June 15. At the same time, a judge will decide whether to seal the transcript from the grand jury which indicted him in August. Alvarez has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Since the indictment, the defense has sought to keep its transcript sealed and was given access to May's work records from both East Palo Alto and Lompoc where he was previously employed. A defense motion to review any previous complaints of investigations is not unusual in cases involving law enforcement although the officer involved is not typically the victim. On Jan. 7, 2006, around 4:30 p.m., May responded to a fight near Weeks Street and University Avenue. The shooting occurred as he went to confront a man, believed to be Alvarez, who was involved in the altercation, according to police. A teenage Explorer scout was with May on a ride-along when the shooting happened but was not injured. Alvarez allegedly fled after the shooting. He was arrested at 6 a.m. the next day after officers found him suffering from a gunshot wound to the leg. He had apparently tried to conceal himself in the rear of a vehicle that police pulled over near the scene of the crime, according to police. Alvarez was on parole at the time of the shooting for two 2004 felony convictions for possession of marijuana with the intent to sell and possession of a concealed weapon. May had been with the East Palo Alto Police Department for about 18 months, although his law enforcement career spanned more than 12 years. He left behind a wife and 3 daughters. Alvarez remain in custody on no-bail status. (source: San Mateo Daily Journal) ************** California seeks advice on lethal injection changes-----Reform efforts also include speeding the implementation of death penalties. California penal officials are traveling nationwide to confer with experts to overcome a federal judge's objections to its execution procedure, according to the state's top prison official. In December, federal Judge Jeremy Fogel found the state's executions through lethal injection unconstitutional, but gave officials until May to present a new procedure. "I have people on my staff who are traveling around the country assessing our policies and procedures and what changes need to be made to be compliant with the court," James Tilton, secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, said in an interview. The courts "have indicated that they think there are improvements that can be made to pass the constitutionality and we are confident that we can do that now," he continued. "By looking around the country we are think that we can provide some improvements to our process that will be compliant." The death penalty is under what may be an unprecedented review in the United States, mostly involving questions about lethal injection, by far the most common method of execution. About 1/3 of the 38 states that allow capital punishment have halted or delayed executions while legal and ethical challenges are resolved. The review by Fogel in San Jose finding "implementation of lethal injection is broken, but it can be fixed" has put executions on hold in California, the nation's most populous state. Lawyers for a condemned California inmate had argued that lethal injection constitutes 'cruel and unusual' punishment barred by the U.S. Constitution. The court proceedings found shortcomings in past executions, including in 2005 when guards could not connect a back-up intravenous line to Stanley "Tookie" Williams, the ex-Crips gang leader who later wrote anti-gang books. "I wasn't here, don't have all the details of it," Tilton, who took office last year, said of past problems. "I read some testimony that caused me some concern." "Clearly we have to reassess our process." Tilton also said he concurred with the chief justice of California's Supreme Court who told Reuters in December 2005 that the state should speed its execution process. "We have people who are over 20 years on death row and that's not prompt justice," Tilton told Reuters. "We've got to find a way to provide those folks their due process. It seems to me that something short of 20, 25 years is more appropriate." For example, an Orange County murderer who was one of death row's longest-serving inmates was found dead Jan. 22 in his San Quentin cell. Marcelino Ramos, 49, was condemned after he held up a Santa Ana Taco Bell in 1979 and ordered 2 employees to "say your prayers" before shooting them. Manager trainee Katherine Augusta Parrott, 20, died; cook Kevin Pickrell, then 18, survived. Ramos arrived on death row in January 1980. Ramos was one of the first dozen inmates on San Quentin's death row, which opened in September 1978. He lived there 27 years awaiting execution. He was 1 of 52 inmates on death row who had been sentenced in Orange County, which has the 3rd most inmates awaiting execution in the state. (source: Orange County Register) KENTUCKY: Intent to seek death penalty filed in social worker's slaying In Henderson, prosecutors will seek the death penalty for 2 people accused of killing a social worker in Western Kentucky in a case that prompted proposed legislation to protect social workers. Henderson County Commonwealth's Attorney Bill Markwell filed a notice of intent this week to try the cases against 33-year-old Renee Terrell and Christopher Luttrell, 23, both of Henderson, as capital cases. A Henderson County grand jury charged the couple with murder, kidnapping, first-degree robbery and theft over $300. "We have reviewed the evidence in its entirety. We believe the conduct of the defendants of murder and robbery raises (the case) to the level where the jury should consider sentences more serious than life in prison," Markwell told The (Henderson) Gleaner on Thursday. Terrell and Luttrell are accused in the Oct. 16 killing of Boni Frederick, 67, and in the kidnapping of Terrell's infant son. Police searched for the 3, who were found taking shelter in a trailer near Godfrey, Ill., about 30 miles north of St. Louis. Authorities said Terrell and Luttrell beat and stabbed Frederick during a scheduled visit that Frederick was facilitating between Terrell and the infant at Terrell's residence in Henderson. The state has custody of the child. The couple are accused of stealing jewelry from Frederick's body and taking her car to leave the area. 1st-degree robbery is considered an aggravating circumstance that makes the case eligible for the death penalty. (source: Associated Press) COLORADO: Death penalty most useful when unused State Rep. Paul Weissmann, D-Louisville, is a reasonable man who has reopened debate on that most unreasonable of subjects, the death penalty. Weissmann, a longtime foe of capital punishment, won a 7-4 approval in the House Judiciary Committee recently for a bill to abolish the death penalty in Colorado by convincing lawmakers that abolition would save the state money - which then could be used to pay for efforts to resolve "cold" cases. Weissmann estimated the state would save an estimated $4.5 million on prosecution and defense attorney fees, mostly at local district attorney's offices, by abolishing the death penalty. At the state level, he thinks ending the death penalty would free up $670,000 a year to fund a seven-member cold-case unit that would investigate unsolved murders, of which Colorado has stacked up 1,200 since 1970. Many critics responded by saying Weissmann had two good ideas but they should be considered separately. As a supporter of the death penalty when fairly and judiciously applied, I'd say Weissmann has just one good idea: the cold-case unit. But you can't pay for that by abolishing the death penalty because there is no evidence that such a move would save a dime. It's easy to tally the cost of prosecuting death penalty cases and handling the subsequent appeals. But Weissmann's calculus makes no accounting of the offsetting savings when the death penalty - by its very existence - prompts savage killers to plead guilty in return for a life sentence. Anybody who has ever watched "Law and Order" has seen Jack McCoy offer to "take the needle off the table" in return for a guilty plea. When such bargains happen in real life, they save the taxpayers millions that would otherwise be wasted in a trial and appeals. More important, guilty pleas spare surviving victims and their family members the anguish of a trial and the many years of appeals that follow a death penalty verdict in this state. About 20 years ago, I served as foreman of the jury in a Denver death penalty case. After we deadlocked 8-4 over the sentence, murderer Timothy Vialpando received a total sentence of 200 years in prison without the possibility of parole. Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter then interviewed me in detail about our jury's reasoning, because he was preparing to try quadruple murderer Michael Bell. After I outlined Vialpando's long history of mental illness, Hunter noted Bell had similar problems. "If you could only get eight votes for the death penalty in Denver, I'll never get 12 in Boulder," Hunter concluded before offering Bell life without parole in return for a guilty plea. Bell accepted, avoiding a trial. Television often makes these plea bargains look flip and cynical. Real-life prosecutors only do them after intensive discussions with victims' families. Most often, the families conclude that the closure offered by a sure life sentence is better than the torture of trial and appeals. I talked Wednesday to Weld County DA Kenneth Buck, who has twice accepted guilty pleas in return for life without parole. Like Hunter, Buck worked closely with victims' families, outlining all the realities of our legal process and finally accepting their conclusion that a life sentence offered closure that a trial and endless appeals would not. But the paradox about such guilty pleas is that only states that have a death penalty on the books can waive it to convince a vicious killer to accept a life sentence. Wisconsin had to take mass murderer Jeffrey Dahmer to trial to win a life sentence because it has no death penalty. Dahmer, with nothing to lose, fought all-out for acquittal - prolonging the agony of his victims' families in the process. The death penalty is thus to criminal law what the nuclear bomb is to national defense - a useful tool to have in your arsenal as long as you don't actually have to use it. (source: Column, Bob Ewegen, Denver Post)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., CALIF., KY., COLO.
Rick Halperin Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:16:25 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
