Feb. 22
TEXAS:
Supreme Court blocks death sentence over racial bias
The Supreme Court blocked the execution of a Texas murderer Wednesday
because of racially discriminatory testimony presented by his own
defense team.
The 6-2 ruling was the second in the court's new term to overturn a death
sentence, and it could be a harbinger of things to come. The justices heard
another death penalty case from Texas in November that hinges on a prisoner's
intellectual disability.
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the ruling in favor of Duane Buck, who was
sentenced to death following the testimony of a defense witness in 1996 who
said he would be more dangerous in the future because he is black.
The testimony "said, in effect, that the color of Buck’s skin made him more
deserving of execution," Roberts wrote. "No competent defense attorney would
introduce such evidence about his own client."
The effect of that testimony, Roberts said, "cannot be dismissed as de minimis.
Buck has demonstrated prejudice."
Texas had agreed several years after Buck's sentencing to reconsider the
sentences of seven prisoners following similar testimony, but they excluded
Buck from the list because the prosecution was not to blame. But Roberts said
such testimony from the defense is even worse.
"Buck may have been sentenced to death in part because of his race," the chief
justice said. "As an initial matter, this is a disturbing departure from a
basic premise of our criminal justice system: Our law punishes people for what
they do, not who they are."
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Thomas wrote that the
racial testimony was secondary to "the heinousness off petitioner's crime and
his complete lack of remorse" for having shot and killed a former girlfriend.
At oral argument in October, it was clear a majority of justices would not let
the death sentence stand. Even Alito, a former prosecutor known for being tough
on crime, said "what occurred at the penalty phase of this trial is
indefensible."
Still, several justices were concerned that Buck's challenge was not raised in
time, and that a ruling in his favor could lead to a flood of other challenges
from prisoners whose convictions have been considered final. Roberts sought to
avoid that outcome by writing a decision tied directly to the facts in Buck's
case.
(source: USA Today)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
