[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., NEB., IND., IDAHO, FLA.

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 31



NORTH CAROLINA:

Governor holds clemency hearing


Those who want to see James Adolph Campbell executed and those who want to
see his life spared made their cases Tuesday to Gov. Mike Easley.

The clemency hearing took place even though a Wake County judge last week
delayed Campbell's Feb. 9 execution, as he did for two other inmates,
because of questions about whether top state leaders had approved a
doctor's limited role in executions. Prison officials have not said
whether they will appeal the ruling or take other action to get the
executions back on schedule.

Also Tuesday, another death row inmate, Archie Lee Billings, filed a
lawsuit in Wake Superior Court to stop prison officials from setting his
execution date. The lawsuit raises the same issues that led to the judge's
ruling last week. Billings was convicted of the 1995 rape and murder of an
11-year-old Yanceyville girl and the stabbing her 13-year-old brother.

Campbell, 45, was sentenced to death for the 1st-degree murder of
Katherine Price, a 20-year-old Kannapolis woman. On Sept. 9, 1992,
Campbell raped Price, twice attempted to strangle her and stabbed her 22
times in the face and neck. At the time, prosecutors say, Campbell had
recently been released from a South Carolina prison after kidnapping and
rape convictions.

Rowan District Attorney Bill Kenerly described Campbell as a serial
rapist, saying Campbell had raped four women before Price.

"He is the most dangerous person I've ever prosecuted. And I've prosecuted
people for their second murder," Kenerly said in an interview last week.

On Tuesday, Kenerly and lawyers with the state Attorney General's Office
said they told Easley why Campbell should be executed.

For Kenerly, there is no question that Campbell is guilty. Kenerly said
that in a 27-page confession, Campbell offered a specific time of Price's
death, telling investigators this detail: He looked at his watch when he
saw the lights go out of her eyes.

"His past crimes in addition to this crime justify the ultimate
punishment," Kenerly said.

Campbell's appellate attorneys, William Livesay and Gordon Widenhouse,
urged Easley to spare Campbell's life, saying his trial attorneys and the
judge failed him.

Livesay said that Campbell's trial attorneys didn't tell the jury details
of Campbell's horrific childhood and mental illness that might have
explained how and why the crime occurred. They said Campbell "snapped"
when he killed Price, and therefore committed at most 2nd-degree murder.

The lawyers also said the jury asked during its deliberations how long
Campbell might spend in prison and whether he could get out for good
behavior. The judge refused to answer the question, they said.

"He would have been 92 before he could be considered for parole,"
Widenhouse said.

The lawyers said that if the jurors had known, they might have sentenced
Campbell to life in prison.

(source: The News & Observer)

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

Death Penalty Needs Review


North Carolina's use of the death penalty increasingly is raising concerns
about its fairness, its cost and its irrevocable nature at a time when a
number of condemned inmates here and elsewhere have been exonerated. Now
another major issue has surfaced, involving the role of doctors in
executions. A ruling by Judge Donald W. Stephens of Wake County Superior
Court gives state officials a solid reason to put the capital punishment
machine on hold.

Stephens' ruling requires the Council of State to approve a change in the
procedure by which executions are conducted. What's involved is the role
of a doctor.

State law specifies that a doctor must be present when inmates are put to
death. However, the N.C. Medical Board, which licenses and sets ethics
standards for doctors, declared earlier this month that while physicians
may serve as observers at executions, they will be acting unethically if
they do anything more.

The reason this is problematic has to do with a controversy over lethal
injection. Lawyers for death row defendants have argued that the drugs
used in executions could leave an inmate in agonizing pain, although
unable to signal it. Thus, they contend that the process could amount to
cruel and unusual punishment, which is unconstitutional. N.C. officials
responded to that concern by installing monitors intended to ensure that
an inmate has been rendered unconscious before paralyzing and
heart-stopping drugs are injected.

Officials with the prison system say that in light of the medical board's
ruling, technicians will observe the monitors, not the doctor on duty. But
whether that change will pass legal muster is uncertain.

Further, the arrangement could put a doctor in a difficult position. What
happens, for instance, if the death drugs fail to kill the person in the
expected time frame? Does the doctor, following a health care provider's
instincts and training, spring into action to revive the inmate - and
violate the policy? Or should he instruct the executioner on how to finish
the job, and still break the new ethics rule?

The case landed in Stephens' court because of a lawsuit, filed on behalf
of inmates scheduled to be executed on Jan. 26 and Feb. 2, questioning the
constitutionality of lethal injections. Those executions were halted as a
result of the ruling. Another set for Feb. 9 also has been put off.

Stephens' ruling, based on an obscure 1909 law, brings the death penalty
issue before a group that hardly expected to have to deal with it. But the
Council of State, 10 officials elected statewide and headed by the
governor, would have the credibility to decide that it's time to take a
long look at the state's death penalty procedures. State Auditor Les
Merritt, for example, pointed out that the costs involved deserve to be
examined.

The state Senate in a previous session agreed to a moratorium on the death
penalty, although that move stalled in the House. Both chambers have ample
reason to reconsider a moratorium this year. But in the meantime, better
for the Council of State to go along with a temporary halt - giving the
legislature, with help from the medical and legal communities, time to
decide the best way to punish those who commit the state's most diabolical
crimes.

(source: The Sun News)




NEBRASKA:

Death penalty debate coming up in Legislature


The 1st Legislature affected by term limits could be headed toward the
first full-fledged debate on abolishing Nebraska's death penalty in many
years.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Brad Ashford of Omaha said he wants to send a
proposal to repeal the death penalty to the full Legislature.

While he supports the death penalty, Ashford said repeal should be
discussed by all lawmakers, not bottled up in committee.

"It is a seminal issue in how we approach crime and punishment. I'll
listen to arguments both in committee and on the floor, but it does need
to get on the floor," Ashford said in an interview.

The Judiciary Committee has scheduled a public hearing today on
Legislative Bill 476, introduced by State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha to
repeal the death penalty and replace it with a sentence of life without
possibility of parole.

5 votes are needed to advance a bill from committee.

Ashford would join 3 death penalty opponents - Chambers, DiAnna Schimek of
Lincoln and Dwite Pedersen of Elkhorn.

The 4 remaining committee members - Sens. Steve Lathrop of Omaha, Amanda
McGill of Lincoln, Vickie McDonald of St. Paul and Pete Pirsch of Omaha -
all said they are keeping an open mind and may join the others in sending
the bill to floor debate.

Attorney General Jon Bruning said that while he does not begrudge the
Legislature's debate, Nebraska should retain the death penalty and
eventually adopt lethal injection as its mode of execution.

"I believe in the efficacy of the death penalty, and I believe Nebraska
should continue to have the death penalty for those rare cases that are
beyond the pale," he said.

No bill to change to lethal injection was introduced this year.

No one has been executed in Nebraska since Robert Williams went to the
electric chair on Dec. 2, 1997, for the murders of two Lincoln women.
Carey Dean Moore, the death row inmate considered closest to execution,
was sentenced in 1979.

If repeal is debated, it would be the first time since 1979 that the full
Legislature has considered the question, said Eric Aspengren of Nebraskans
Against the Death Penalty.

That year, lawmakers approved a repeal law. It was vetoed by then-Gov.
Charles Thone.

In 1988, the Legislature debated replacing the death penalty with a flat
30-year minimum prison sentence.

In 1992, a repeal proposal came out of the Judiciary Committee, but
support fell away and the measure never was brought up for debate.

In 1999, the Legislature voted for a 2-year moratorium on executions while
the death penalty's fairness was studied. The moratorium was vetoed by
then-Gov. Mike Johanns.

Chambers, who has introduced a repeal proposal every legislative term
since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, said he
expects the committee to advance LB 476. He offers no predictions on its
ultimate fate.

"The issues, other than the emotionalism, will be heard by (most senators)
for the first time," he said.

Chambers has less than two years remaining under term limits to accomplish
his long-time goal of repealing the death penalty. Getting rid of the
death penalty is as important to him today as it was in the very
beginning, he said.

"I look at this effort like a marathon. It's necessary to pace yourself so
you have the same amount of strength as you started," he said.

In an Associated Press survey before the session began, 29 legislators,
including Pirsch and McDonald, said they opposed repealing the death
penalty.

McDonald said Tuesday that she has not decided how she will vote in the
Judiciary Committee.

"The jury's still out. It's been a long time since there's been an
execution in Nebraska," she said. "Maybe we need to address this issue
again."

Pirsch supports the death penalty in the most heinous circumstances. He
said he may consider voting the bill out for debate.

"It's a healthy debate," he said. "It's a very somber, serious act that
the state takes; it deserves that level of review."

McGill and Lathrop said they have concerns about the death penalty.
Although he neither supports nor opposes the death penalty, Lathrop said
he may vote to advance the bill just so it can be debated by the full
Legislature.

(source: Omaha World-Herald)






INDIANA:

Death penalty change debated----Senate measure would exempt the mentally
ill


Indiana could be the 1st state to prohibit the execution of mentally ill
people under a bill debated by a key Senate corrections committee Tuesday.

No vote was taken on Senate Bill 24, which would allow a judge to find in
the beginning of a case that a defendant has a severe mental disability or
disorder that significantly impairs the ability to appreciate the
wrongfulness of his or her conduct.

Currently, jurors can use mental illness as mitigating evidence when
considering the death penalty, but it is still legal for a mentally ill
person to receive the death penalty so long as he is not mentally
retarded.

Several members of the Senate Corrections, Criminal and Civil Matters
Committee focused their questions on the level of mental illness that
would be required to meet this new definition and those people who
purposely stop taking their medication.

But Kathy Bayes,  executive director of National Alliance for the Mentally
Ill Fort Wayne, testified that mental illness is about brain dysfunction,
not choices made.

She told the members about her highly educated husband slipping into
psychosis. He believed his family would be attacked by the Antichrist and
was stockpiling guns and knives to defend them. At one point, her daughter
became so afraid that she installed a lock on the inside of her door.

"It isn't anything he did," Bayes said. "It isn't his fault. His brain is
broken."

Eventually, with proper medication, her husband returned to relative
normalcy. He leads a support group and no longer is obsessed with anger or
violence. But if he had committed a crime, Bayes said, "these are not the
people we should be giving the death penalty to. These people are very
sick."

Steve Johnson, executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys
Council, testified against the bill, saying it means legislators don't
trust Indiana citizens on juries to make the right call when presented
with all the evidence during the sentencing phase of a trial.

He believes the state should wait for a U.S. Supreme Court opinion on a
similar case that is currently pending before it moves forward.

Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, held the bill so that legislators could
consider the significant policy change before possibly taking a vote next
week.

(source: the Journal Gazette)



IDAHO:

No death penalty for smuggling-case driver


Prosecutors said they will not seek the death penalty against a driver
arrested for investigation of human smuggling after his crowded van
crashed near Idaho Springs, killing 4 people.

Jose Franco-Rodriguez, 23, of Mexico, who has been deported from the
United States twice for being here illegally, appeared Tuesday in federal
court in Denver.

Franco-Rodriguez is charged with transporting unlawful aliens in the
United States resulting in death and unlawful re-entry of a previously
deported alien.

In November, Franco-Rodri guez was driving eastbound on Interstate 70 in a
Dodge van filled with 14 passengers from Mexico when he lost control on a
snow-packed curve, hit a tree and rolled the van, authorities said.

Franco-Rodriguez, who is in federal custody, faces a possible life
sentence because of the deaths.

But prosecutors said Tuesday they will not pursue a death sentence against
him. His next court appearance is scheduled for Friday.

(source: Denver Post)


FLORIDA:

Daytona killer wins chance to get off death row in '89 plot----A judge
agreed with 'Kosta' Fotopoulos' claims that his death sentence was unfair.


The man behind one of Central Florida's most bizarre and sensational
murder plots has won a victory in his attempt to get off death row.

An Orlando federal judge has ruled in favor of resentencing Konstantinos
"Kosta" Fotopoulos, who was condemned to die for masterminding the 1989
scheme to kill his wife with the help of his lover, a plot that left 2
teenagers dead.

U.S. District Judge Gregory A. Presnell ruled Monday that Fotopoulos
deserves a new sentencing hearing, which could lead to a new penalty trial
for Fotopoulos.

Carolyn Snurkowski, who heads the criminal appellate division for the
state Attorney General's Office, said Tuesday that her office will appeal
the ruling, so a new penalty trial will have to wait for a final federal
decision.

The case is expected to go to a federal appeals court in Atlanta.

Still, State Attorney John Tanner, who prosecuted the original trial in
1990, said his office is prepared to go through the sentencing phase again
if necessary.

"We're gearing up to begin the resentencing process and, if need be, we'll
retry the penalty phase and seek the death sentence," Tanner said.

Fotopoulos' attorney, James L. Driscoll Jr., said Tuesday that he was
pleased with the federal ruling.

"For Mr. Fotopoulos, this is an extremely significant ruling, but it still
has to go through the appellate process in federal court," said Driscoll
of Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, which represents death-row
inmates.

Fotopoulos, 47, once ran a pool hall on the Daytona Beach Boardwalk and
has spent the past 16 years on death row for the notorious plot to kill
his then-wife, Lisa, for $700,000 in life insurance.

The plot began, according to court records, when Fotopoulos videotaped his
former lover, cocktail waitress Deidre Hunt, tying 19-year-old Kevin
Ramsey to a tree and shooting him to death.

He then used the tape to gain leverage over Hunt, persuading her to hire
18-year-old Bryan Chase to stage a burglary at the Fotopoulos home. During
the burglary, Chase shot Lisa in the head as she lay beside her husband in
bed. Kosta Fotopoulos then shot and killed Chase.

Lisa survived but still has a bullet in her head.

Hunt originally pleaded guilty to the killings and was sentenced to death.
She was allowed to withdraw her guilty plea in 1995 when the Florida
Supreme Court decided her former attorney improperly sold her story to the
tabloid TV show A Current Affair.

During her 1998 trial, Hunt was convicted of her role in the killings but
was sentenced to life in prison.

Fotopoulos' former wife remarried and is now Lisa Psaros, who, along with
her brother Dino Paspalakis, runs a gift shop and an arcade on the Daytona
Beach Boardwalk, carrying on the tradition of Greek-American families who
have run many Boardwalk businesses. Neither could be reached for comment
Tuesday.

In the new federal ruling, Presnell agreed with two of Fotopoulos' claims
that his death sentence was unfair. The judge pointed out that prosecutors
had set up two starkly different pictures of Hunt's role in the murder
scheme.

During Hunt's original sentencing hearing, she had been portrayed by
prosecutors as a coldblooded murderer who wasn't coerced by anyone. During
Fotopoulos' trial, prosecutors portrayed her as a battered woman
controlled by her lover.

The jury in his trial had been profoundly affected by the battered-woman
portrayal, the judge wrote, as well as the knowledge that Hunt was already
sentenced to die.

The federal judge wrote that Fotopoulos' original defense attorney failed
by not taking advantage of the markedly different portrayals of Hunt.

"Had defense counsel done so, it would not only have impeached Ms. Hunt's
testimony, it would have brought into question the integrity and
credibility of the prosecution itself," Presnell wrote. "There can be no
more powerful defensive tactic than the impeachment of one's opponent."

(source: Orlando Sentinel)