[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----TEXAS

[Rick Halperin]

March 5



TEXAS----impending execution(s)

Prison gang chief linked to about 15 killings to die Tuesday


A Texas prisoner is set to die Tuesday for a 2 1994 murders during what
authorities called an internal power struggle within the Mexican Mafia, a
notoriously violent prison gang that took its extensive presence outside
Texas prison walls.

Robert Perez, 48, rose in the military structure of the organization to
the top ranks of general.

Besides the fatal shootings of Jose Travieso and James Rivas, evidence at
his capital murder trial tied Perez to another 15 or so killings,
including a gangland-style execution of 5 people in 1997.

Perez would be the 7th Texas inmate to receive lethal injection this year
in the United States' busiest capital punishment state and the 1st of 2
facing execution this week. Joseph Nichols, convicted of killing a
convenience store clerk more than 26 years ago, is scheduled to die
Wednesday.

The U.S. Supreme Court in October refused to review Perez's case. A
federal judge in Houston last week dismissed a lawsuit that tried to stop
the execution by challenging the Texas lethal injection procedures as
unconstitutional. His lawyer said no additional appeals were planned.

"It's pretty hopeless," Don Vernay said.

Perez, a father of 8, declined to speak with reporters in the weeks
preceding his execution date.

He first went to prison in 1987 on a 10-year term for stabbing a man
numerous times in the heart and stomach. He was paroled in 1990 and had
the parole revoked 2 years later. He was out after only three months,
released in 1992 on mandatory supervision, a form of probation.

Soon after, he became a much more prominent figure in the gang.

Heriberto "Herbie" Huerta, president and a founder of the Mexican Mafia in
Texas, was convicted in 1994 on racketeering charges and sentenced to life
in a federal prison, leaving a split in the group he'd established 10
years earlier while imprisoned for murder conspiracy and racketeering. The
gang was intended to provide protection for Hispanics in Texas prisons.

One faction lined up with Perez, who while out of prison still maintained
allegiance to Huerta. Another faction was led by Luis "Blue" Adames.

According to trial testimony, Perez and 2 companions spotted Adames' car
at a San Antonio public housing project in 1994, went home to get weapons
and returned intending to kill him. Adames wasn't there, but his
supporters were and the men all exchanged gunfire.

Killed were Rivas, 27, and Travieso, 34, who'd been in a wheelchair as a
result of wounds from a previous shooting. It wouldn't be until 1997 that
Perez was indicted for their slayings. The following year, Perez was among
about a dozen Mexican Mafia members charged with racketeering and
involvement in more than a dozen murders.

His capital murder trial, moved from San Antonio to Dallas because of
publicity in his hometown, began in 1999, a month after he was convicted
in the federal case where he faced a life sentence without parole.

David Bires, one of Perez's trial lawyers, who described Perez as "an
absolute gentleman," recalled last week how he urged jurors to spare
Perez's life because Perez already was headed to a maximum security
federal lockup and never would get out. Prosecutors countered by showing
jurors scenes of other gang murders carried out at Perez's orders, they
said.

"Absolutely gruesome," Bires said. "Some of the most horrendous evidence
I've ever seen in 36 years practice of law."

Prosecutor Mary Green said among her witnesses was an informant who had
served as Perez's triggerman.

"Beaver would say: 'Get rid of so and so.' And this guy would do it," she
said.

Travieso's nephew, who was at the 1994 shooting scene and survived,
testified against Perez, as did Perez's 2 companions. The jury decided
Perez, who didn't testify, should die.

ON THE NET ---- Robert Perez http://www.deathrow-usa.us/RobertPerez.htm

Texas Department of Criminal Justice execution schedule
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/scheduledexecutions.htm

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

Jessica deserves better law than HB 8-----How many more people would be
reluctant to turn in a family member or friend if it meant death row?


We should honor the memory of Jessica Lunsford with more than flawed
legislation.

The House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence met last week to hear
proposed bills, among them HB 8, Jessica's Law, introduced by Rep. Debbie
Riddle, R-Houston.

In 2005, 9-year-old Jessica was raped, kept captive for days and then
buried alive. When her body was unearthed, her hands were bound, but she
still managed to wiggle one finger free of the plastic that enclosed her.
John Evander Couey, her neighbor and a convicted sex offender, later
confessed and was convicted of her rape and murder.

Thus began the crusade of Jessica's Law to "fight to change legislation,
provide a grassroots awareness and continuous support base and search,
locate and help law enforcement apprehend absconder pedophiles." However,
the law proposed by Rep. Riddle is a hideous alteration of Jessica's Law
as it was meant to be.

The bill introduced by Rep. Riddle has 4 major propositions. First, it
proposes to change the statute of limitations from 10 to 20 years after
the 18th birthday, and would make a 1st sex offense a 1st-degree felony.
Second, HB 8 proposes to deny parole to anyone who commits a sexually
violent offense on a victim 13 years or younger. Third, it requires GPS
monitoring of civil offenders.

So far, so good, but it is the fourth proposition that strikes wide of the
mark: HB 8 proposes to make a second conviction for a sex crime against a
person under 14 years a capital felony, resulting in either life
imprisonment or the death penalty.

There is a thin line between deterrence and helping victims and outright
vengeance. There is also a thin line between justice and going too far.
Rep. Riddle has crossed the line on both accounts.

Does the death penalty truly help victims? Private citizens and former
victims are replying with a resounding no.

Most sex offenders commit their crimes against children of family members
or friends. Victims already feel a tremendous amount of guilt. How much
would that guilt be magnified if a child were put in the position of
having caused the family member or friend to suffer the death penalty? How
many more people would be more reluctant to turn in a family member or
friend if it meant death row?

Numerous prosecutors have also voiced a concern. A case that seeks the
death penalty must have irrefutable evidence. If a child is emotionally
traumatized to the point where he or she cannot testify, prosecutors often
attempt to compromise with the defendant for a lesser charge.

Sometimes, that is the best they can do with the evidence given. Without
this wiggle room, it would be all or nothing. Children who are emotionally
unable to testify could see their perpetrators go free.

At last week's hearing, Rep. Harold Dutton, D-Harris, exp-ressed concern
over whether the "death or life imprisonment" clause of HB 8 would give
sex criminals an incentive to kill their victims. The penalty would be
essentially the same whether they did or not, and a dead victim leaves no
witnesses.

Rep. Allen Vaught, D-Dallas, voiced that imposing the death penalty for a
crime in which the victim's life is not taken brings up issue with
constituional rights. In Coker v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that
the death penalty was a "grossly disproportionate and excessive"
consequence for the rape of an adult woman. When confronted with this,
Rep. Riddle stated that Coker v. Georgia concerned adult women, and HB 8
concerns children.

Regardless, the Supreme Court has not clarified its decision regarding the
death penalty for the rape of children. Thus, HB 8 risks being declared
unconstitutional. Because of the legislation's last proposition, the
entire bill could be kicked out, and the 3 other propositions that
actually help victims and deter sexually violent crimes would be rendered
invalid.

Proposition 4 of HB 8 makes the entire bill invalid. It is a bill that, as
written now, is more political sport than actual results. Some
representatives are sticking so stubbornly to the original bill that it's
creating so much controversy that it is unlikely to be passed at all.

Jessica deserves better. Will the State of Texas deny that? Today, the
House will vote on the bill. Let's hope they get the message that Jessica
deserves better.

(source: Brenda Tso is a government and philosophy senior; UT Daily Texan)

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

House passes its version of 'Jessica's Laws' bill


The death sentence for habitual child predators and harsher penalties for
first-time offenders won tentative approval in the House on Monday after
lawmakers spent all weekend trying to fix a politically popular bill in
peril.

The measure would remove the statute of limitations from most sex offenses
against children and create a new felony crime in Texas, continuous abuse
of a child, defined as at least two offenses over at least 30 days.

A first conviction would bring a mandatory 25-year prison sentence. A 2nd
conviction would result in a capital charge, which carries life in prison
or the death penalty.

The bill was approved 118-23. After a final approval, expected Tuesday, it
goes to the Senate, which is expected to pass its own version. Lawmakers
would then negotiate the differences.

The bill is a top priority for state leaders, including Gov. Rick Perry
and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.

House Democrats expressed concern about the death penalty provision,
saying fewer children might report abuse by a relative or friend if that
person could be executed. But attempts to strip out the death penalty or
make it optional were overwhelmingly rebuffed.

TAKING SIDES

The arguments for and against "Jessica's Law":

Proponents say:

 Longer sentences with no possibility of parole and sentencing repeat
child sex offenders to death will prevent a large number of sex crimes.

 Increasing the statute of limitations for sexual crimes against children
will aid prosecutors by allowing children to speak up after they have
become adults.

Opponents say:

 Tougher penalties could make juries more hesitant to convict sex
offenders and might prompt sex offenders to kill their victims to
eliminate witnesses.

 The possibility of the death penalty might make those abused by family
members less likely to report the crime and testify in a capital case.

(source: Dallas Morning News)

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

Condemned inmate in double slaying in Dallas loses appeal


Condemned inmate Joseph Lave, convicted in a 1992 case where 2 employees
of a suburban Dallas sporting goods store were killed in a robbery, lost
an appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court when justices on Monday refused to
review his case.

Lave was convicted of capital murder for the slaying of an 18-year-old
employee at the Richardson store where another employee was killed and a
third wounded.

The decision from the high court would appear to move him a step closer to
execution.

"I don't want to comment on what's next," Lave's lawyer, Walter Long,
said, saying only that he wasn't surprised with the decision and that he
hoped to discuss the case with prosecutors. "We have some things they
might want to pursue with us."

Lave, who grew up in Houston and worked as a parcel delivery truck driver,
does not have an execution date.

Lave, now 42, was convicted under the Texas law of parties for being
involved when Justin Marquart was killed during the robbery of a Herman's
Sporting Goods store in Richardson on Thanksgiving eve in 1992. Another
18-year-old, Frederick Banzhaf, also was killed, and Lave received a life
prison term for that murder before he was tried for the Marquart slaying.
A 3rd employee, Angela King, the store's assistant manager, was attacked
and testified against Lave.

All 3 were beaten with a hammer and had their throats cut. King, however,
was able to call 911 and identify 1 of her 3 attackers as James Langston.

Langston was shot and killed when he tried to run over police trying to
arrest him. Inside his shoe, they found a card with the name of one of his
accomplices, Timothy Bates. After his arrest, Bates identified Lave as the
3rd person involved in the robbery.

When police searched Lave's car and apartment, they found some loot from
the robbery. Authorities said $2,950 in cash, 21 rifles and shotguns and
athletic clothing were taken. Lave surrendered to police 2 days later
after he rented a Cadillac and drove to New Orleans, where he was told by
a friend that he was a suspect in the Richardson slayings.

In his appeal, Lave, who did not testify at his capital murder trial,
challenged the testimony of a police officer who was told by Bates that
Lave killed Marquart.

Lave's appeal argued his lawyers should have had the opportunity to
question Bates, who they said was pressured and misled by police into
shifting blame to Lave. But according to records in the 5th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals, which earlier turned down Lave's appeal, Lave and his
trial lawyer agreed with prosecutors at the trial that Bates would not be
called as a witness.

In an earlier unsuccessful appeal, Lave pointed to the agreement in his
argument that his trial lawyer was ineffective.

(source for both: Associated Press)

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

Fort Bend man found guilty of capital murder


Bart Whitaker was found guilty today on a charge of capital murder by a
Fort Bend County jury in the slayings of his mother and brother who were
gunned down in their Sugar Land home.

The punishment phase of the trial is expected to start Tuesday and
prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

The verdict was read by state District Judge Cliff Vacek after the jury
deliberated two hours and 25 minutes.

Patricia Whitaker, 51, and Kevin Whitaker, 19, were each killed by single
9 mm gunshots in an ambush. Bart's father, Kent Whitaker, 57, was wounded,
as was Bart.

Co-defendant Steve Champagne, 24, testified earlier that Bart's wound was
a ploy to make it look like he was a victim, too. The ruse was intended to
make police think a burglar had shot the family.

A third defendant, accused triggerman Chris Brashear, 24, will be tried
separately. Champagne, the getaway driver, has accepted a 15-year prison
sentence in exchange for his testimony.

The trial started Feb. 26 with Kent Whitaker telling jurors he believed
his son was guilty in the slayings.

3 witnesses in the trial have testified that Bart wanted to kill his
family so he could inherit the family estate valued at more than $1
million. The jury also heard details of two aborted plots to kill the
family.

Testimony in the trial ended with Fort Bend County prosecutors calling the
state's final 4 witnesses to the stand Friday. The defense rested without
calling any witnesses.

(source: Houston Chronicle)

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

New Prosecutor Revisits Justice in Dallas----District Attorney Embraces
Innocence Project and 'Smart on Crime' Approach


Craig Watkins is still settling into his 11th-floor office overlooking the
city skyline, hanging up pictures, arranging his plaques -- and
revolutionizing the criminal justice system he oversees.

Sworn in as Dallas County district attorney on Jan. 1 -- he is the first
elected black district attorney in Texas -- Watkins fired or accepted the
resignations of almost two dozen high-level white prosecutors and began
hiring minorities and women.

And in an unprecedented act for any jurisdiction in the nation, he
announced he would allow the Texas affiliate of the Innocence Project to
review hundreds of Dallas County cases dating back to 1970 to decide
whether DNA tests should be conducted to validate past convictions. At 12
in the past 5 years, Dallas has more post-conviction DNA exonerations than
any county in the nation and more than at least 2 states. A 13th
exoneration, of a Dallas County man, is expected to be announced within
days.

By his own estimate, Watkins should not be occupying what he calls a
"10-gallon-hat, cowboy-boot-wearing, dip-chewin',
lock-'em-up-and-throw-away-the-key" post in the 9th-largest city in the
country.

He's black, he's a Democrat, he's young, he was a defense lawyer with an
office in a southside neighborhood, and he has no prosecutorial experience
-- unless he counts a year-long internship handling misdemeanors in the
city prosecutor's office. His 2 previous applications to work as an
assistant district attorney in Dallas County were rejected, in fact, by an
office in which a prosecutor once produced a manual on how to exclude
minorities from Texas juries.

In November, Watkins, 39, was elected as part of a Democratic sweep in
Dallas in which the party took 42 judgeships and 6 other countywide
offices. He is the 1st Democratic district attorney in 20 years. During
the campaign he promised to be "smart on crime," not just tough on crime;
to ask for the death penalty when appropriate but also to advocate for
better rehabilitation programs and post-release support services for
ex-convicts.

"You know what people call it? 'Hug-a-thug,' " said Watkins, imposing at 6
feet 5 yet soft-spoken, as he sat in his office after his latest "guest of
honor" appearance, at a local high school's Black History Month assembly.
"People say I'll coddle these criminals. But it's not about coddling
criminals; it's about being smart."

That, he believes, means ensuring that the right people are behind bars.

Post-conviction DNA analysis in certain cases has been allowed in Texas
since 2001. Since then, 354 people convicted in Dallas County -- most were
in prison, but some were on parole or probation or were done with their
sentences -- have asked for the DNA testing. The Dallas district
attorney's office agreed to 19 requests; trial judges, who reviewed the
district attorney's recommendations, ultimately granted the requests of 34
people.

That, said Watkins, tells him a "get a conviction at all costs" approach
"utterly failed us."

"The question becomes: Do you stand in the way of justice or do you be the
wind behind it to make sure that justice gets done?" Watkins said. "We're
not being soft on crime. We're being sure we get the right person going to
jail."

Most of the exonerations date to cases tried in the 1980s under Dallas's
legendary law-and-order district attorney, Henry Wade. Attempts to reach
Watkins's predecessor, Bill Hill, were unsuccessful.

This time, the screenings of cases to determine whether they are eligible
for post-conviction DNA testing will be done by Texas Weslayan University
School of Law students. They will work under Mike Ware, an adjunct law
professor and board member of the Innocence Project of Texas, who believes
that prosecutors and judges may have previously taken an overly stringent
view of the Texas statute and denied testing that might have led to
exoneration.

"I have to respect [Watkins's] willingness to certainly take his oath of
office to heart and be dedicated to true justice, which is what his oath
of office requires," Ware said.

(source: Washington Post)

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

Supreme Court Denies Appeal Of Texas death row Inmate


A Texas death-row inmate won't get a hearing of his appeal to the US
Supreme Court.

The justices Monday let stand Joseph Lave's death sentence for the 1992
killing of a suburban Dallas sporting goods store worker during a robbery.

Lave was convicted of capital murder for the slaying of 18-year-old Justin
Marquart at Herman's Sporting Goods in Richardson the day before
Thanksgiving 1992.

Before that, he was sentenced to life imprisonment for the slaying of
Marquart's 18-year-old co-worker, Frederick Banzhaf.

A 3rd worker, Angela King, also was wounded in the robbery.

All 3 were beaten with a hammer and had their throats cut. King, however,
was able to call 911 and identify 1 of her 3 attackers as James Langston.

Langston tried to run over police trying to arrest him and was shot and
killed.

But inside his shoe, police found a card with the name of one of his
accomplices, Timothy Bates.

Bates, after his arrest, identified Lave as the third person involved in
the robbery.

Lave, who grew up in Houston and worked as a parcel delivery truck driver,
doesn't have an execution date yet.

(source: KWTX)





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

Predator law costs disputed----Critics challenge low estimate for state's
tougher child-sex penalties


Under the politically popular sex offender penalties known as "Jessica's
Laws," California will spend nearly $130 million next year tracking child
predators. Florida will shell out close to $12 million. Louisiana, the 1st
state to sentence a child sex predator to death, will spend $1 million.

But the version of Jessica's Law up for a vote in the Texas House today
will cost Texans next to nothing for at least 5 years, according to
financial reports prepared by legislative budget analysts.

Critics say that's impossible. Rep. Debbie Riddle's bill - which
authorizes the death penalty or life without parole for repeat child sex
offenders, increases sentences for certain first-time child sex offenders
and prohibits early release from prison or parole for violent child sex
offenders - would require more money for prison beds and corrections
guards, they argue.

And a Dallas Morning News analysis of states with Jessica's Laws similar
to those Texas is considering found that almost all of them had to set
aside millions of dollars immediately to follow through on their
legislation.

But proponents of the bill and the fiscal analysts who crafted the
estimate note that the statute won't apply to many offenders; it's written
to catch "the worst of the worst," and only those inmates will be serving
lifetime prison sentences. Plus, a major expansion of global positioning
systems, a costly tracking component of most states' Jessica's Laws, isn't
included in the current House bill.

"All I can tell you is, the fiscal note on this has come back that it
basically doesn't have an impact," said Ms. Riddle, R-Tomball, referring
to the analysis conducted by the Legislative Budget Board. "At this point
I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary."

That estimate "is laughable," said Steve Hall, whose StandDown Texas
Project advocates a moratorium on the death penalty.

"When you look at Texas, with a larger population than most of these
states, with severe penalties for sex offenders, it is inconceivable that
you're not going to see increased costs in this state," he said. "It
certainly makes you wonder if they were too rushed to do a thorough job or
if politics intruded."

The original Jessica's Laws - which generally impose 25-year mandatory
minimum sentences for child sex predators, require lifetime electronic
monitoring and create 2,000-foot safety zones around parks and schools -
passed in Florida in 2005 after the sexual assault and slaying of
9-year-old Jessica Lunsford. The man on trial in the case is a convicted
sex offender.

So far, more than 20 states have implemented versions of the laws, and
Florida, Montana, Louisiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina have given
prosecutors the go-ahead to seek the death penalty for repeat child sex
predators. It's unclear whether the punishment is constitutional; the U.S.
Supreme Court has said that only crimes resulting in death can bring
execution, though advocates say the court might rule differently in a case
where the victim is a child.

Legal concerns

Last week, Texas lawmakers put the brakes on the fast-moving House bill
given emergency priority by Gov. Rick Perry, in part because of those
legal concerns. Ms. Riddle said she'll present amendments today to clarify
the death penalty provision and create a new offense of "continuous sexual
abuse of a child," one that would come with a mandatory 25-year minimum
sentence.

Officials with the Legislative Budget Board said they couldn't comment on
the differences between the estimated cost of Jessica's Law in Texas and
its cost in other states. They pointed to the text of their report, which
indicates there will be "no significant fiscal implication to the state"
for the first five years after the bill's passage.

After that, the report says, the law still will not be costly because it
will only affect a "small percentage of persons convicted of sexually
violent offenses." The provision in Ms. Riddle's bill that increases
penalties for 1st-time child sex offenders will have the greatest effect,
the analysts wrote - requiring another 489 prison beds by 2027. Because
that's more than 5 years out, they don't attach a dollar figure to the
fiscal note.

"We were actually surprised and encouraged it was that low," Jon English,
Ms. Riddle's chief of staff, said of the prison bed estimate.

The Senate version of the bill, which includes a 25-year minimum sentence
for 1st-time violent child molesters and some expansion of GPS monitoring,
hasn't reached the full Senate, so its financial analysis has not yet been
released.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the chief champion for the Senate version, has
estimated that lifetime GPS monitoring would cost about $14 a day - just
over $5,000 a year per offender. And Don Forse, chief of staff for Sen.
Bob Deuell, the Greenville Republican who filed the Senate bill, said he
"wouldn't anticipate it being much different from the House version as far
as the fiscal implication goes."

In other states with similar Jessica's Laws, however, the cost has been
more immediate.

California's budget includes close to $130 million next fiscal year to
implement Jessica's Law, which includes GPS monitoring. The Florida
Legislature has budgeted $11.9 million annually, money to fund additional
prison beds, corrections officials and GPS monitoring devices.

And corrections officials in Wisconsin determined that their Jessica's
Laws - which impose stiff mandatory minimum sentences for violent
predators - would require nine new prisons over 25 years, at a cost of
more than $400 million. Nonetheless, the bill was approved.

A Tennessee version that included the death penalty and failed last year
would have cost the state an extra $14 million a year. That bill has been
reintroduced this year without a capital punishment provision.

Montana, which already has a death penalty provision but is considering
longer sentences and GPS tracking, estimates its costs will increase by
about $3 million annually.

These types of costs are logical, corrections experts say.

Longer sentences

Longer sentences mean that prisons already jampacked will need more beds
and have higher operating costs, and be responsible for medical care for
inmates aging in the system.

Currently, it costs $14,600 a year to incarcerate an inmate in Texas; a
25-year minimum sentence here would cost close to $365,000. More than
10,000 inmates are now serving sentences for violent sexual assault
against a child, and hundreds more have been given probation or deferred
adjudication. Texas' prison system is already at capacity, so the state
would have to either free other offenders or build new units.

Meanwhile, corrections experts say, the costs of trials and appeals in
death sentence and life imprisonment cases are staggering, sometimes
reaching $1 million per case. Executions themselves can cost upward of
$15,000.

"Lawmakers say, 'We're just changing the law - enacting a measure doesn't
cost us anything,' " said Tim Bray, a criminologist with the University of
Texas at Dallas. "But it's the impact that costs us money. All of the
money is tied up in the increased cost of incarceration."

(source: Dallas Morning News)