May 31
TENNESSEE:
Motion to strike death penalty fails
An effort to get the judge to accept a defendant's courtroom utterance of
"guilty" during arraignment on a 10-count indictment for the deaths of 4 young
Cumberland Countians failed and it is expected that this week's ruling will be
appealed.
Criminal Court Judge David Patterson Wednesday denied defense attorney Robert
Marlow's motion to toss the state's notice of enhanced punishment against Jacob
Allen Bennett, 26, who is charged in the September 2013 shooting deaths of
Danielle Rikki Jacobsen, 27, her nephew Dominic Davis, 17, Steven Presley, 17
and John Lajeunesse, 16.
When issuing his ruling, Patterson said that it was his opinion that when
Bennett said he was guilty, he did not enter a plea "knowingly and
voluntarily," and that he, as judge, had not accepted Bennett's utterance as a
guilty plea.
"The court is concerned that the defendant didn't understand what was going
on," the judge said. Patterson added that he saw "red flags all over," and to
have proceeded with the arraignment with Bennett not having benefit of an
attorney "it would have been improper for the court to go any further."
When asked after the hearing if he intended to appeal the judge's ruling,
Marlow nodded his head in the affirmative.
If successful in having the death penalty stricken and Bennett's response in
open court that he was guilty allowed to stand, the options left to the state
would have been life in prison without parole or life in prison with parole.
Marlow and defense attorney James Simmons of Murfreesboro presented 2 public
defenders as witnesses during the hearing. Both had previously represented
Bennett in cases where Bennett pleaded guilty.
Public Defender Mark Blakley, who represents the district that includes
Fentress County, represented Bennett on two charges and testified that his
client was aware of all his rights and entered his pleas "knowingly and
voluntarily."
Assistant Public Defender Cynthia Lyons, who represented Bennett in cases in
Cumberland County, testified that she reviewed Bennett's rights with him before
entering guilty pleas to two lower level felonies.
"If a defendant wants to plead guilty and knows his rights ... he has a right
to plead," Lyons said she believes.
When cross examining Blakley, Deputy District Attorney Gary McKenzie asked,
"Isn't there an ocean of difference between pleading guilty to a Class E felony
(the lowest felony) and a Class A (capital murder) felony?" Blakely agreed.
This caused Marlow to ask Blakley, "A defendant's rights don't increase with
seriousness of the crime, do they?"
Faced with the same question, Lyons said, "There is no difference in rights
from charge to charge."
Under questioning from Attorney General Randy York, Lyons agreed that a
defendant "has to understand what he is giving up," but maintained that she was
not certain that the rules of procedure that apply to defense attorneys also
apply to a defendant who represents himself. Lyon added that she has had
clients in the past plead guilty at arraignment and that she knew of no rule
against defendants doing so.
Marlow was going to call Sheriff's Investigator Casey Cox to the stand, but
attorneys from both sides agreed that he would testify that he read Bennett his
rights when the defendant was first taken into custody and that Bennett signed
a Miranda form stating he understood. Bennett then implicated himself in the
killings after having signed, saying he understood his rights.
"That plea of guilty might have been the smartest thing he could do," Marlow
said of Bennett's statement at arraignment.
Marlow argued that he did not believe the court has a right to continue an
arraignment, giving state prosecutors time to file notice they planned to seek
the death penalty. He said in his motion that by doing so, the action
prejudiced Bennett.
McKenzie countered in his argument to the court that Bennett simply made an
incriminating statement and that there was no plea entered the 1st day of
arraignment. He added that the defendant "has to be advised" of the
ramifications and that it was not the court's duty to "hand walk the defendant"
through a plea.
Marlow concluded that the only difference between the arraignment plea being
allowed to stand and the state seeking the death penalty is that if the death
penalty is given, "...the state decides the time and manner of death."
If the plea is allowed to stand, with all the enhancement factors involved, it
would still be a death sentence because Bennett would never be eligible for
parole. Enhancements cited by Marlow and the state include that the killings
were heinous, atrocious or cruel, were committed to avoid prosecution and were
committed during commission of another crime (robbery).
"If you run them all together, it is still better than death," Marlow said.
The case against Bennett and co-defendant Brittany Lina Yvonn Moser, 25, of
Dayton, were continued to Aug. 13. It is expected that the defendants will be
tried separately.
(source: Crossville Chronicle)
***********************
Tennessee Electric Chair Law Reignites Capital Punishment Debate
Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam has signed a bill allowing for the use of the
electric chair in executions in that state when the appropriate drugs are not
available for lethal injection. Botched executions over the past months and an
increasing refusal by some foreign manufacturers to make the necessary drugs
available has prompted a number of states to look for alternative ways to carry
out executions, including a return of such archaic but effective methods as the
firing squad.
Haslam's signature followed passage of the bill in April, with the State Senate
voting 23-3 and the House 68-13 to reintroduce the electric chair as an
alternative to lethal injection. The bill's main sponsor, Republican State
Senator Ken Yager, explained that he introduced the bill because of "concern
that we could find ourselves in a position that if the chemicals were
unavailable to us that we would not be able to carry out the sentence."
Tennessee has 74 inmates on death row, and since 1999, condemned prisoners have
had the option of choosing the electric chair over lethal injection. The last
one to do so was Daryl Holton, a Gulf War veteran who was electrocuted in 2007
for the murders of his three sons and stepdaughter with a rifle 10 years
earlier.
(source: The New American)
MISSOURI----new execution date
Mo. Supreme Court sets execution date for man who killed 3
A northern Missouri methamphetamine dealer convicted of killing another drug
dealer back in 1995 is scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection in
July.
According to the Missouri Supreme Court the execution of John Middleton, 54, of
Mercer County, is set for 12:01 a.m. on July 16th at the state prison in Bonne
Terre.
Court papers state that Middleton murdered Iowa resident Alfred Pinegar, also a
meth dealer.
Documents say Middleton killed Pinegar in a Harrison County Field, shooting him
in the back twice and once in the face.
Months after his arrest, Middleton told a fellow inmate that he had killed
Pinegar because he was afraid he was going to snitch on him.
Middleton was also convicted of killing 2 other people for the same reason in
1995.
(source: heartlandconnection.com)
OKLAHOMA:
Oklahoma town lays claim to 'Old Sparky' in battle over electric
chair----Officials say state's unwired chair could be put back into service if
challenges to its lethal injection procedures are upheld
The Oklahoma department of corrections is in dispute with the city of McAlester
over who owns the state's unwired electric chair, which may be put back into
service if challenges to Oklahoma's lethal injection procedure are upheld.
Corrections spokesman Jerry Massie said the electric chair is in storage.
"We haven't had much discussion about it, because it's not been real pressing
at the moment," Massie said. "We haven't had that discussion yet, seriously."
Asked if the chair would be rewired and used again, Massie said: "It is
possible."
But he added: "There is not much possibility of that, unless lethal injection
is declared unconstitutional."
State law allows for the electric chair or a firing squad to be used only if
lethal injection is found to be unconstitutional. Oklahoma's execution
procedures are under review after the April 29 botched lethal injection of
Clayton Lockett, who writhed, groaned and tried to speak. He suffered what
corrections director Robert Patton said appeared to be a massive heart attack
and died 43 minutes after the execution began. There have been no executions in
the US since Lockett's.
Attorneys for Charles Warner, who was to die the same night as Lockett in a
rare double execution, are watching the review closely. He was granted a stay
of execution after Lockett's death and is now scheduled to die on November 13.
The dispute over the chair predates the current execution crisis. Massie told
the McAlester News-Capital on Friday that he stands by the department's claim
to the chair.
McAlester mayor Steve Harrison told the Guardian that the electric chair should
be on display for the public to see.
"I would like to get it displayed somewhere since it is a historical artefact,"
Harrison said. "I don't think it does anybody any good for it to sit in storage
somewhere."
He said the chair, nicknamed Old Sparky, had been in a museum McAlester - a
town of about 18,000 that is home to the state's death chamber - until the
corrections department took it back.
"The transfer happened a number of years ago, and I'm not sure anybody has the
complete story on who legally owns it," Harrison said. "I'm not sure where it
is."
Harrison said he expects if Oklahoma planned to electrocute an inmate, the
state would get a new electric chair.
"That chair has not been used since 1966," Harrison said. "My assumption would
be if it ever got to the point the electric chair was needed again they would
start with a new one. Can't imagine they would use one that hasn't been used in
50 years."
The chair, first used in 1915, was used to execute 82 inmates before it was
retired. The last inmate to sit in it was James French, who was killed on 10
August, 1966, for the murder of his cellmate.
Bill Ervin, of McAlester, whose law firm represents the city, said the chair is
"not much to look at."
"It's an antique," Ervin said. "If that's the one they're talking about, I
don't know why they would use that one (in an execution)."
As states grapple with a European-led boycott over lethal injection drugs, some
have proposed returning to old methods such as the electric chair and the
firing squad. This month, Tennessee's governor approved the use of the electric
chair for executions where drugs could not be acquired.
Some states - Florida, Alabama and Virginia - have long listed electrocution as
an optional execution method. The last US inmate to die by electrocution was
Robert Gleason, who chose it over lethal injection and was killed on 16
January, 2013, in Virginia.
(source: The Guardian)
COLORADO:
Judge in US theatre shooting rejects 3 more defence attempts to rule out death
penalty
The judge in the Colorado theatre shooting case has rejected 3 more defence
attempts to rule out the death penalty if defendant James Holmes is convicted.
Holmes is charged with killing 12 people and injuring 70 in the 2012 assault on
a movie theatre. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Prosecutors are
seeking the death penalty.
The judge on Friday denied motions arguing that execution would violate the
state and federal constitutions because there was no grand jury indictment.
Colorado law allows prosecutors to file charges themselves or through a grand
jury. No grand jury was convened for Holmes.
The trial is scheduled to start in October with jury selection.
Defence lawyers have made multiple attempts to bar the death penalty, and so
far all have failed.
(source: Associated Press)
UTAH:
Utah Supreme Court denies death row inmate's claims
The Utah Supreme Court on Friday rejected a death row inmate's claims that a
trial judge erred by rejecting a request for funds to investigate whether
Honie's trial attorney adequately represented him in connection with the
vicious beating and killing of his ex-girlfriend's mother.
Benn was bitten, beaten, stabbed 4 times in the throat, sexually assaulted and
mutilated. A neighbor called police after hearing what sounded like a gun shot
but was likely glass breaking as Honie, who was intoxicated on alcohol and
marijuana, smashed a patio door. Police arrived at the home as Honie walked
outside, covered in blood.
According to court documents, he voluntarily told police, "I stabbed her. I
killed her with a knife."
Officers found 3 of Benn's granddaughters, at least 1 of whom presumably
witnessed the attack, inside the home. One child was covered in blood.
An attorney for Honie argued before the high court in September that having
more complete information about Honie's background could have been used to
provide a better defense during his trial and, at sentencing, might have spared
him the death penalty.
But the Utah Supreme Court found unanimously that Honie had failed to raise "a
genuine issue if material fact as to his ineffective assistance of counsel,"
and that a judge was correct in denying Honie additional funds to investigate
the issue.
In previous appeals, Honie argued his conviction and sentence should be tossed
because of a racially insensitive comment made by a prosecutor at trial, lack
of proof Benn was alive when she was sexually assaulted - the aggravating
factor that led to the capital murder charge - and that Utah's death penalty is
unconstitutional. Those appeals failed.
(source: Salt Lake Tribune)
ARIZONA:
Arizona judge rejects bid to nix death penalty for Jodi Arias
An Arizona judge has again turned down a bid by convicted murderer Jodi Arias
to be spared the death penalty during her sentencing retrial for killing her
ex-boyfriend in 2008, court documents showed on Friday.
In a written ruling, Judge Sherry Stephens dismissed claims made by attorneys
that the case was compromised when a key member of Arias' defense team was
temporarily barred from visiting Maricopa County jails.
"The defendant has failed to establish she suffered any prejudice as a result
of the incident involving the mitigation specialist," Stephens said in a ruling
logged by the court on Friday but dated May 27.
Mitigation specialist Maria De La Rosa, who helps gather information to spare
defendants a death sentence, was barred in March from the jail system after
being accused of smuggling one of Arias' drawings out of a facility.
The ban by sheriff's officials was lifted a week later and she was again
allowed to visit Arias, who faces a September retrial of the penalty phase of
her case.
Arias, 33, was convicted last year of killing Travis Alexander in his
Phoenix-area home in what authorities have described as an especially brutal
murder. He was found slumped in the shower, stabbed multiple times, his throat
slashed and shot in the face.
The jury that convicted the former California waitress of murder also found her
eligible to be executed, but could not decide if she should actually be
sentenced to death, prompting a penalty phase mistrial.
A new jury is set to be picked on Sept. 8 in a high-profile case that has been
delayed for months by maneuvering that has occurred almost exclusively behind
closed doors. If there is another deadlock, a judge will sentence Arias to
natural life in prison or life with the possibility of parole after 25 years.
The original trial took 5 months to complete, with jurors given a heavy dose of
graphic testimony, bloody photographs and sex-laced situations. Arias testified
for 18 days, proclaiming her innocence and maintaining she acted in
self-defense.
(source: Reuters)
*********************
Jodi Arias asks for death penalty to be lifted: Video former juror 1 yr later
It was May of 2013 when Jodi Arias was convicted of 1st degree murder, and was
found eligible for the death penalty by a jury of her peers. That same jury
however was deadlocked on whether or not to impose death and thus a retrial of
the sentencing phase would occur. In June of 2013 ABC News reported that this
retrial of the sentencing phase could go on for as long as one more year. This
speculation was based on reports that the Jodi Arias defense team began then
what would become a long history of stall tactics in their efforts to avoid the
death penalty. On May 30 Reuters reported that the latest stall tactic in the
Jodi Arias defense has been denied.
The retrial of the sentencing phase to determine life over death for Jodi Arias
will begin on Sept. 8 as planned, well over a year past the ABC News predicted
dates in June 2013. Reuters reports that key members of the case including the
prosecution and the defense were in court this week to discuss a motion filed
by the defense requesting the death penalty be lifted from the sentencing
options.
Reuters reports that the defense for Jodi Arias argued in court this week that
the case had been compromised recently when mitigation specialist for the
defense Maria de la Rosa had been banned from visiting Jodi Arias in jail. This
incident is no small incident and has been taken very seriously by both the
prosecution and the defense in this case.
The reason for that is the decision to impose either the penalty of life in
prison or the death penalty will be largely based on mitigating factors, and
Maria de la Rosa is the one responsible for managing that component of the
case.
The Toronto Relationship Examiner has reported on the incident in question,
when mitigation specialist Maria de La Rosa got her wrists slapped for
smuggling what appeared to have been artwork out of the Maricopa County Jail.
Some sources close to the case have speculated that the materials Maria de la
Rosa was smuggling was not in fact artwork and may have been other pertinent
information banned from leaving the jail.
As was shown in evidence at her trial, Arias does have a history of smuggling
coded prison messages, and thus the Maria de la Rosa incident would not have
been the 1st time such an incident allegedly occurred. When Maria was caught
smuggling the material, she was immediately banned from visiting her client
Jodi Arias at the Estrella Maricopa County Jail. That ban was brief, as her own
legal representation argued that this ban was a violation of her Constitutional
freedoms, and of Jodi's as well.
The defense argued in court this week that this entire situation has created
"prejudice" on the case, and that this is cause for a removal of the death
penalty in the sentencing options. That is, the defense made a mistake
attempting to smuggle something that was considered contraband out of the
Estrella Jail, then attempted to use the drama surrounding their own mistake as
cause for removing the death penalty from the list of sentencing options.
In a ruling that was logged on May 27 but received in the courts Friday, May 29
Judge Sherry Stephens ruled, "The defendant has failed to establish she
suffered any prejudice as a result of the incident involving the mitigation
specialist."
On Sept. 8, jury selection to retry the sentencing phase will begin, and the
motion to take the death penalty off the table has been denied with that
ruling. Some court watchers are under the mistaken impression that this will be
a retrial of Jodi's guilt or innocence, it will not. Jodi has been found guilty
by a jury of her peers, not of the court of public opinion. She is a convicted
felon who awaits sentencing.
This ruling is not the first ruling that Judge Stephens has made in the long
list of stall tactics the Jodi Arias defense team has created. In June 2013 ABC
News reported that Jodi was considering a deal to avoid the death penalty. One
month later ABC News reported that the Jodi Arias defense was trying to delay
the retrial for a year. In July 2013 Judge Stephens put her foot down and said
to expect sentencing to occur in Sept. 2013.
In Aug. of 2013 as seen in the slideshow records here, another delay request
from the defense when they asked Judge Stephens to vacate the aggravating
factor phase verdict entirely. This was the phase that jurors found Jodi Arias
eligible for the death penalty. Had the defense been successful in their bid to
vacate this verdict, the death penalty would be off the table by default. That
too was denied.
More delays throughout the fall. In Feb. 2014 the defense asked that the
retrial be canceled on the basis that a retrial of a penalty phase was
"unconstitutional". That was denied. In March 2014 lead for the defense filed a
motion asking to have the penalty removed as one of the options in the options
for sentencing. Today, Reuters reports that motion has been denied.
All this time, the family of Travis Alexander has waited.
Many people thought this was an easy decision for the jurors, but many jurors
from the case have spoken out since on what that process was like in that room,
having to decide between someone's life, or someone's death. In the interview
shown here, juror #6 in the Jodi Arias trial talks about how difficult it was
coming down to that decision.
She said the most difficult part was seeing "the impact on the victims, and the
victim's family." She also said she wasn't happy with how things were left.
"Um, I didn't feel that we completed our job. I don't like to see things go
undone."
The family of Travis Alexander continues to wait, and will see it through until
it is done.
It would not be unreasonable to speculate that Judge Stephens is getting just
as frustrated with the stall tactics as the family of the victim. Judge Sherry
Stephens answers not only to the family of the victim, but to the good
taxpaying people of Arizona.
Monica Lindstrom former criminal defense laywer, legal expert for HLN and
contributor to KTAR reported to KTAR in May 2014 that the Jodi Arias trial had
already cost Arizona over $2 million dollars. That is because every time a
motion is filed, court appearances are made, the legal fees do add up. Monica
reported that these costs don't even include "jail costs, court costs,
prosecution costs, post-trial appeal costs, and actual execution costs; and the
trial itself isn't even over."
This would not be the 1st defense team that used every stall in the book on the
State's dime.
Retrial of the sentencing phase will begin Sept. 8. Parties will appear in
court on July 1 for capital case management conference matters.
(source: The Examiner)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
