May 19
FLORIDA:
Lawyers in Sievers, Rodgers cases: Trial long way off, no death penalty
decision
Lawyers involved in the Lee County murder cases of Mark Sievers and Jimmy
Rodgers said Wednesday that they're a long way from trial, with thousands of
pages of records still to be shared between the sides.
At a case management conference for the 2 defendants, prosecutors also said
they haven't made a decision about whether to seek the death penalty in the
case of Rodgers. They didn't speak to whether a decision has been made in
Sievers' case, but no filing has been made.
"I can tell you the state is right now considering all options," Assistant
State Attorney Hamid Hunter said. Prosecutors have until mid-June to make a
decision.
Sievers is accused of coordinating the killing of his 46-year-old wife, Bonita
Springs Dr. Teresa Sievers, with his lifelong friend, Curtis Wayne Wright Jr.
Investigators believe Wright and Rodgers traveled from their home state of
Missouri and bludgeoned Teresa Sievers to death in her home in June 2015 while
Mark Sievers was in Connecticut.
Wright has pleaded guilty to a 2nd-degree murder charge and agreed to cooperate
with prosecutors in exchange for a 25-year prison sentence. Mark Sievers and
Rodgers have pleaded not guilty to 1st-degree murder charges.
Hunter said more than 43,000 pages of evidence have been shared with lawyers
for Rodgers and Sievers, with another large set of cell phone and tower records
expected in the coming weeks.
"It's taking a lot of time," Hunter said.
Chief Assistant Public Defender Kathleen Fitzgeorge, who's representing
Rodgers, said it's been "slow going" as prosecutors gather and share evidence.
The 2 sides are "not even close" to starting depositions, she said.
"There are no forensic reports. There is a very basic, basic crime scene
report. In my opinion, in my experience, there is a lot missing," Fitzgeorge
said.
Rodgers hasn't waived his right to a speedy trial. If Rodgers doesn't waive
that right, prosecutors could be required to take the case to trial by late
August.
Mark Sievers has waived his speedy trial rights.
The next scheduled court dates are June 21 for Rodgers and July 27 for Mark
Sievers.
(source: Naples News)
****************
Death penalty uncertain in another Tampa murder case
Prosecutors said an ice cream truck driver - seeking revenge and armed with a
gun - killed 2 and injured 4 back in 2010. But the death penalty may not be on
the table for defendant Michael Keetley based on the ongoing controversy with
Florida's death penalty sentencing guidelines.
The U.S Supreme Court said Florida's death penalty sentencing procedure was
unconstitutional, because it gave too much power to a judge, and not the jury.
Attorney Anthony Rickman explained why lawmakers still haven't solved the
confusion.
"What the Supreme Court didn't do is address whether the jury's decision should
be unanimous or some sort of super majority," explained Rickman.
Lawmakers scrambling to fix the law, chose a super-majority. Under the new
guidelines, a 10 to 2 vote is all a jury needs to hand down a death sentence
and the jury's decision is final.
In its latest motion, Keetley's attorney said the new law is still
unconstitutional, adding, the vote should be unanimous, as all verdicts are.
Rickman reviewed the motion for FOX 13 News and said, "it's either a unanimous
decision or it's not, and if it's not, they have the opportunity to sentence
that person to life in prison."
Last week, a Miami judge rejected the new death penalty guidelines based on his
analysis of social norms and the constitution, Rickman said.
In his ruling, Circuit Judge Milton Hirsch wrote, "every verdict in every
criminal case in Florida requires the concurrence, not of some, not of most,
but of all jurors - every single one of them."
Rickman added, "in a petty theft case, like taking a Kit Kat from from a Kash
and Karry, you need a unanimous verdict. You need all six jurors, because its a
misdemeanor. Why, then, on a murder case where you are sentencing someone to
death, do you need less than that?"
A Tampa judge is expected to hear arguments on Keetley's motion May 20.
(source: Fox news)
ALABAMA:
Teaser's shooting trial delayed again amid questions about capital punishment
Death row inmates and those awaiting trial on capital murder charges in Alabama
could be impacted by an ongoing Florida court case recently ruled on by the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Houston County Circuit Judge Brad Mendheim this month delayed indefinitely the
trial of Ryan Clark Petersen who is accused of gunning down 3 people in 2012 at
Teasers, a Wicksburg strip club.
In his order, Mendeim cites Hurst vs. Florida, an ongoing case involving death
row inmate Timothy Hurst. Mendeim - and defense attorneys and prosecutors
agreed---inferred the Hurst case could potentially impact death sentences in
Alabama.
In the Hurst case, Justice Sonia Sotomayor reaffirmed the Sixth Amendment's
requirement that juries, not judges, must decide the sentence for those
convicted of captial murder.
The sentencing scheme in Alabama and Florida allows a jury to recommend - not
necessarily on a unanimous vote - whether convicted defendants should receive
the death penalty or life in prison without the possibility of parole. The
judge is not bound by the recommendation.
Florida now must re-sentence Hurst - convicted of killing and robbing a
restaurant manager before placing her body in a large freezer-- by allowing a
jury to determine whether the facts of his case merit the death penalty.
Another issue to Mendheim is a case involving an Alabama inmate whose appeal is
based upon the Hurst case. The U.S. Supreme Court, on May 2, tossed an Alabama
appeals court judgment against Bart Johnson.
The state Court of Criminal Appeals must now reconsider the case of Johnson who
was sentenced to death in the 2009 killing of a Pelham police officer.
"This ruling implicates all (capital) cases in Alabama," said Bryan Stevenson,
founder and executive director of Equal Justice Initiative. "We have argued
that Alabama's statute no longer conforms to current constitutional
requirements."
The basis for the Hurst case stems from a ruling involving Ring vs. Arizona.
That western state has traditionally sentenced in the same fashion as Alabama
and Florida.
For the death penalty to be an option certain criteria must be met. In
Petersen's case, he was charged with capital murder because 2 or more people
were killed.
His attorney, Ben Freeman, favors the delay because the Hurst case must be
resolved before Petersen is tried. It's unknown at this time when that will
happen.
It's also not known what effect the ruling will have on the 185 inmates---13
sentenced in Houston County - who are on death row.
(source: WTVY news)
OHIO:
Hamilton County prosecutor wants Ohio Supreme Court justice to recuse himself
on death penalty case----Jeffrey Wogenstahl was set for execution in 2017
Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said he's "extremely troubled" by recent
decisions from the Ohio Supreme Court that could let 2 convicted killers escape
the death penalty.
So troubled, in fact, that he's asking one of Ohio's top judges to recuse
himself from 1 of those cases.
Jeffrey Wogenstahl was convicted in 1993 of murdering Amber Garrett 2 years
earlier. She was 10 when Wogenstahl kidnapped her, killed her and dumped her
body in a field near Bright, Indiana, prosecutors alleged.
Martin Pinales, a legal expert, said the Ohio Supreme Court's new ruling to
grant a new briefing is extremely uncommon. He said the court might be "very
troubled" about some evidence in the case, perhaps hair analysis evidence.
"At that time, a person was able to take a microscope and look at 2 pieces of
hair samples and say, 'Ah, they look alike, so it must have been from the same
person,'" he said. "That is all way past, and hair analysis samples are
absolutely junk science now."
The court also suspended Wogenstahl's execution date, which was set for Sept.
13, 2017.
"The Supreme Court is saying, 'Hey, wait a minute. We are going to allow you to
restart this case,'" Pinales said. "It is rejuvenated. Now you can go back to
the Supreme Court on a direct appeal on facts."
Deters filed a request for Justice William O'Neill to recuse himself from the
Wogenstahl case, "given his repeated comments in the Wogenstahl decision and
numerous other cases that he will not follow Ohio law and will never impose the
death penalty."
Pinales' take: "It's not going to happen."
Deters has also filed a motion asking the Ohio Supreme Court to reconsider its
decision to grant Anthony Kirkland a resentencing hearing. Kirkland was
sentenced to death in 2010 for murdering an SCPA 7th-grader and another
Cincinnati teen -- the last of his 5 victims. He was found guilty of aggravated
murder, attempted rape and other charges in the girls' deaths.
Before his trial, Kirkland also pleaded guilty to the slayings of 2 other
Cincinnati women and received life sentences. He previously served a 16-year
sentence for killing his girlfriend.
At the sentencing phase, the prosecutor wondered whether the girls' killings
were "just freebies for him," raising questions of whether that may have
prejudiced the jury. Prosecutors argued in a 2011 filing with the court that
the prosecutor's comment was appropriate because part of the death penalty case
against Kirkland was that the girls' killings was part of a "course of conduct"
involving 4 victims.
If the Ohio Supreme Court won't reconsider, Deters has asked the justices to at
least provide a written explanation on why they feel Kirkland should get
another sentencing hearing.
(source: WCPO news)
NEBRASKA:
Capital punishment foes step up efforts to persuade voters to keep death
penalty repeal
Opponents of the death penalty stepped up efforts Wednesday to sway voters to
retain Nebraska's repeal of capital punishment.
2 state senators and a retired judge who once sentenced a killer to die in the
electric chair spoke at a press conference arranged by the group Retain a Just
Nebraska.
They said they wanted to counter an argument by pro-death penalty advocates
that convicted murderers will be released from prison unless voters restore
capital punishment.
If the repeal stands, those convicted of 1st-degree murder would face a
sentence of life in prison. In Nebraska, inmates sentenced to life have no
chance of parole, unless their sentences are later commuted by the Nebraska
Board of Pardons. The board - made up of the governor, attorney general and
secretary of state - has rarely awarded such commutations in Nebraska.
"Life imprisonment means life in prison, no chance of parole," said retired
Sarpy County District Judge Ronald Reagan. "Anything else is political
posturing and has no grounding in the legal realities."
Reagan served on a 3-judge panel that gave a death sentence to child rapist and
killer John Joubert, who was executed in the electric chair in 1996.
Reagan personally opposed the death penalty because, in his view, it is applied
unfairly and doesn't deter crime. But as a judge, he was compelled to apply the
law as written.
Reagan was joined at Wednesday's event by State Sens. Colby Coash and Adam
Morfeld, both of Lincoln. The senators were among those who voted to repeal the
death penalty in 2015.
The Legislature also overrode the veto of Gov. Pete Ricketts. The governor then
joined other death penalty supporters to back a voter petition drive to restore
capital punishment.
Voters will decide Nov. 8 whether to keep the death penalty, which was switched
to lethal injection in 2008.
(source: omaha.com)
***********
Pro-Death penalty campaign says opponents are confusing voters
Republican and Democratic state senators met with death penalty opponents, both
in Lincoln and Omaha Wednesday, claiming a pro-death penalty movement is
confusing voters, leading them to believe murderers could be released without
the death penalty.
Leading the meeting, were senators Colby Coash and Adam Morfeld, along with
retired District Court Judge Ronald Reagan, who sentenced death row inmate,
John Joubert to death for 3 murders back in 1997.
In unison with Retain a Just Nebraska, a campaign urging the retention of LB
268, the Nebraska Legislature's vote to end the death penalty, the senators had
one message for voters: "Life in prison, means life in prison."
"If voters are concerned that without the death penalty those currently on
death row will ever be paroled, they should simply ask the Governor or Attorney
General which of the 10 men on death row he is going to commute to a sentence
less than life," says Morfeld.
The Nebraska Board of Pardons, which consists of the Governor, the Attorney
General, and the Secretary of State, is the only exception and can commute a
life sentence to something lesser.
"I don't think it takes a political scientist or a seasoned politician to know
that that's not likely and that's not going to happen for somebody who
committed that heinous of a crime," says Morfeld.
Robert Evnen, a lawyer and co-founder of the Nebraskans for the Death Penalty
disagrees.
"The Pardons Board is a very powerful body - no court can review its decision.
It can do whatever it wants and three years ago, it decided to commute the
sentence from somebody who had been sentenced to life in prison. It happens,"
says Evnen.
He says opposing advocates are quickly dismissing the reality of murderers
being released on parole.
"Opponents of the death penalty say 'well, take a look at whose on the Pardons
Board, they'd never do such a thing' But who would've suspected that the people
who were on the Pardons Board then would have done it. It's something that
could happen. And they want to deny it. But they're wrong and they're
misleading people about that," says Evnen.
Both organizations said they will be campaigning hard from now until November
and work to clear some of the confusion amongst voters.
(source: KMTV news)
_______________________________________________
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
