Nov. 17
PENNSYLVANIA:
Accused Wilkinsburg mass shooters run out of legal funds
The same defense attorneys who have been privately representing 2 men accused
of killing 5 adults and an unborn child in Wilkinsburg will continue their work
but will now be funded by taxpayers.
Cheron Shelton, 29, of Lincoln-Lemington and Robert Thomas, 28, of Homewood are
charged with 5 counts of criminal homicide as well as homicide of an unborn
child stemming from the March 9 attack during a cookout at a home on Franklin
Avenue.
Both Shelton's attorney, Randall McKinney, and Thomas's lawyer, Casey White,
were initially privately retained by the defendants, but have now been
appointed by Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge David R. Cashman to continue
on the case because Shelton and Thomas do not have the funds to pay them.
If the men are found guilty of 1st-degree murder, prosecutors will seek the
death penalty.
Mr. McKinney and Mr. White will handle the trial portion of the case. If the
defendants are convicted, Wendy Williams will represent Shelton while Michael
Machen will represent Thomas.
To sentence the men to death, the jury must find unanimously that the
prosecution has proved at least one aggravating factor in the case, and that
factor must outweigh any mitigation presented by the defense.
In its notice it would seek capital punishment, the Allegheny County District
Attorney's office listed four aggravators, including that the defendants
created a grave risk of death to others during the crime; that the men have a
significant history of felony convictions using the threat of violence; that
they have been convicted of another crime before or at the time of the current
offense - for which life imprisonment or the death penalty is possible; and
that they have been convicted of another murder before - or at the time of -
the current offense.
Killed in the attack were Jerry Michael Shelton, 35, Brittany Powell, 27, and
Chanetta Powell, 25, and their cousins Tina Shelton, 37, and Shada Mahone, 26.
Chanetta Powell was 8 months pregnant.
Investigators said that the shooters that night fired 2 volleys. One person,
using a handgun, fired 18 shots from the back of the yard, while the other,
using an assault-style rifle, fired 30 shots at the crowd of people.
Police have said that the men were targeting Lamont Powell, who attended the
cookout with several relatives, because they believed he shot and killed Calvin
Doswell of Lincoln-Lemington in 2013.
Powell was injured in the shooting but survived. He has not been charged in the
Doswell case.
(source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
NORTH CAROLINA:
DA to seek death penalty in double homicide
Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against the suspects in the death of
two men whose bodies were found in a burned-out car in September.
District Attorney David Learner's office made the announcement this week in
Burke County Superior Court in the double homicide cases against Icey Chennell
Gooden, 26, of 4217 Sundown Road, Morganton, and Brian Jerome Robinson, 33, of
Connelly Springs.
The 2 are each charged with 2 counts of murder for the Sept. 17 deaths of
Spencer Murray and Albert Austin, both from Forest City, whose bodies were
found in the trunk of the burned vehicle.
Scott Devon Hemphill, 33, of 2320 Farmer St., Apt. B, Charlotte, also has been
charged with 2 counts of murder and Brandy Nicole Davis, 32, of 906 Jamestown
Road, Apt. D3, Morganton, was charged with accessory after the fact to homicide
in the case.
The bodies of Murray and Austin were discovered around 8 a.m. on Sept. 18 when
Burke County Sheriff's Office deputies were called to Canoe Creek Way in
Morganton. When they arrived, deputies found a burned Cadillac Deville with
human remains inside, according to previous reports.
With the assistance of an investigator with the North Carolina License and
Theft Bureau, investigators learned the Cadillac belonged to Austin, of 555
Poors Ford Road, Lot 5, in Forest City, and was registered to Murray, of 165
Astrid Lane, in Forest City, according to previous reports.
The case remains under investigation by the Burke County Sheriff's Office and
North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation.
(soruce: The News Herald)
******************
Death Penalty To Be Sought In Murder Case Involving Burned Vehicle
The cases against 2 people accused of the deaths of 2 men in Burke County in
September 2016 will proceed as capital matters.
Prosecutors for the State announced this week in Burke County Superior Court
that they will pursue the death penalty in the double homicide cases against
26-year-old Icey Chennell Gooden of Morganton and 33-year-old Brian Jerome
Robinson of Connelly Springs.
Gooden and Robinson are each charged with 2 counts of murder for the September
17 deaths of Spencer Murray and Albert Austin, whose bodies were found in the
trunk of a burned vehicle.
The case remains under investigation by the Burke County Sheriff's Office and
North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation.
(source: WHKY news)
ALABAMA----impending execution
Alabama death row inmate agrees to untried 1-drug lethal injection
A federal judge should order Alabama to execute a death row inmate with an
untried 1-dose lethal injection method, attorneys for the inmate said today.
But first, the judge should rule that the state's current 3-drug method is
invalid and can't be used in future executions, according to a court document
filed by attorneys for death row inmate Ronald Bert Smith. The Alabama
Department of Corrections also hasn't yet submitted an acceptable method for
administering the one-drug method, the attorneys say.
Smith is set to be executed Dec. 8.
U.S. District Court Judge Keith Watkins, in an order issued last week gave
Smith's attorneys until today to submit in writing why he should not order
Alabama to execute Smith using "a large initial dose of midazolam, followed by
continuous infusion" of that drug.
The Alabama Attorney General's Office has until Friday to respond to Smith's
attorneys response.
Smith is among a group of Alabama death row inmates challenging Alabama's
3-drug lethal injection protocol for executions. Alabama, along with other
states, have developed different drug combinations after drug manufacturers
started refusing to supply execution drugs the states had been using.
U.S. District Court Judge Keith Watkins, in an order issued Wednesday, tells
Smith's attorneys to submit in writing, on or before noon on Nov. 16 why he
should not order Alabama to execute Smith using a large dose of midazolam.
When death row inmates file lawsuits challenging a state's method of execution
as cruel and unusual punishment, they must offer suggestions to the court of
alternate methods of execution that are safe and not painful. Among the
suggestions by Alabama inmates have been firing squad and hanging - both
options Watkins dismissed because they are not set out in Alabama law.
Inmates also have suggested using a large, single dose, of midazolam as an
alternative method.
"This court can and should order the defendants to use Mr. Smith's identified
single-drug midazolam alternative," according to Smith's attorneys. "Before it
can do so, this Court must enjoin the defendants (ADOC) from using the present
protocol, and this court must be satisfied that defendants have adopted an
adequate protocol, including accounting for all necessary equipment and
sufficient training to execute Mr. Smith using his proposed single-drug
midazolam alternative."
The attorneys, however, disagree with the way the state suggested it would
administer the midazolam.
What Smith had suggested, based on testimony from a doctor, was injection of a
large bolus of midazolam followed by a continuous infusion of midazolam. But
what Alabama Department of Corrections suggested in court document is injecting
Smith with 500 mg of midazolam, followed by repeated 500 mg injections, if
necessary.
According to a doctor's report, if midazolam was to be used as the sole agent
for lethal injection, a loading dose between 2,500 to 3,750 mg could be used
followed by a continuous IV infusion until death, Smith's lawyers state in
their response. "This would be preferable to repeated boluses of midazolam
until death, as the bolus method would result in spikes and dips in
concentration while the continuous infusion method would provide a continuous
increase in the drug until death," according to the court document.
One of Smith's concerns regards what a witness claims she saw in the Jan. 21
execution of Christopher Brooks, the 1st - and so far only - execution
conducted Alabama's 3-drug lethal injection method.
Stephen Cooper, in his post, points to an April 15 complaint filed by a federal
public defender representing death row inmate Ronald Bert Smith, who is now
scheduled to be executed Dec. 8.
After his execution, a witness in the viewing room testified one of Brooks'
eyes opened after the consciousness assessment and remained open until the
curtain was closed in the viewing room, according to the judge's order.
"The eye episode has become a central component of the Eighth Amendment (cruel
and unusual punishment) claim in the current complaint of Mr. Smith, in the
motion to dismiss, and in the response to it - particularly in Mr. Smith's
objection to midazolam as a sedative in the 3-drug protocol," the judge stated
in his order last week. "Mr. Smith argues that midazolam will inadequately
anesthetize him, thereby causing severe pain upon the infusion of the 2nd and
3rd drugs in the protocol, rocuronium bromide and potassium chloride,
respectively."
"It is undisputed that potassium chloride causes severe pain to a conscious
person," Watkins states.
Watkins writes that he ultimately dismissed the notion of a 1-drug protocol in
Brooks' case as "fraught with peril" arising out of a number of unanswered
concerns.
But it's time to reconsider it the 1-dose option, according to Watkins.
"Changes in the posture of the case dictate that the court explore the
midazolam option pled and urged by Mr. Smith and presently offered by
defendants (Alabama Attorney General's Office)," Watkins stated in his order.
Smith, who has been on death row since Oct. 6, 1995, was convicted in Madison
County in the November 1994 slaying of Circle C convenience store clerk Casey
Wilson during a robbery. A judge overrode a jury's 7-5 recommendation for life
without parole and imposed the death penalty.
Smith's attorneys on Monday also filed an appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court
asking that the state's death penalty law be declared unconstitutional in light
of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that struck down Florida's law in January in
the case Hurst v. Florida.
"Ronald Smith was never sentenced to death by a jury," the appeal to the
Alabama Supreme Court states. "A judge made factual findings contrary to the
jury's findings and sentenced him to death. The United States Supreme Court has
made it plain that such a system and such a sentence violates the Constitution.
The question before this Court is: How can Mr. Smith's sentence stand? The
answer: It cannot. Mr. Smith's death sentence must be vacated, and the jury's
verdict of life without parole must be reinstated."
The Alabama Supreme Court, in a recent ruling, however, rejected another appeal
that also argued that Alabama's law allowing judicial override was
unconstitutional in light of the Hurst v. Florida ruling. The Alabama Supreme
Court ruled that Alabama's law is constitutional.
***************
Death penalty on the table for suspects in fake-marijuana slaying of Alabama
drug dealer
2 Huntsville men accused of killing an Alabama drug dealer because he sold them
fake marijuana could face the death penalty if found guilty of capital murder.
The Morgan County District Attorney's Office has notified 25-year-old
Huntsville residents Jovan Anderson and Gary Hill that prosecutors intend to
seek the death penalty in the killing of 30-year-old Brandon Harris.
Harris, 30, was found dead in a vehicle on Wadsworth Street in Decatur on Nov.
13, 2015. Police say Anderson and Hill fired 9mm rounds into the car and struck
Harris in the back and arm.
Because the shots were fired into car, Anderson and Hill were charged with
capital murder. The charge is punishable by life in prison without the
possibility of parole or the death penalty, if prosecutors choose to seek it.
A status hearing previously set for Nov. 21 has been rescheduled for Jan. 6 at
9 a.m. Morgan County Circuit Judge Steven Haddock rescheduled the hearing to
allow the attorneys additional time to prepare because of the state's notice of
seeking the death penalty, court records show.
A witness to the killing told police he heard several gunshots then saw
Anderson and Hill return to their vehicle and drive away.
This witness told officers Hill called him shortly after and asked him to
recover the shell casings from the crime scene, although police say the witness
refused.
Harris was 1 of 5 people killed in Decatur in 2015. The previous year, no
homicides were reported in the city of about 55,000 residents.
Anderson and Hill each remaine housed at the Morgan County Jail. Hill is held
without bail, which is standard for a capital murder suspect.
Anderson is held with bail set at $150,000 after Haddock, in an unusual move,
set bail for a capital suspect.
Haddock made the decision before the suspects were indicted by a grand jury
last year.
"Because (Anderson) has not been indicted by the grand jury, there is no
presumption of guilt for the purpose of setting bail," Haddock wrote in the
order. "Rather, for bail to be denied in a capital case, the state must produce
evidence that is clear and strong and that would lead a well-guarded and
dispassionate judgement to the conclusion that the offense has been committed;
the accused is the guilty agent; and he would probably be punished capitally if
the law is administered."
In a statement to police, Anderson pinned the crime on Hill, court records
show.
(source for both: al.com)
**************
Prosecutors to seek death penalty in 2015 shooting of Brandon Harris
2 Huntsville men indicted for capital murder in the November 2015 shooting
death of a Decatur man have been notified that prosecutors intend to seek the
death penalty if either man is found to be guilty, according to court records
filed earlier this week.
Jovan Deante Anderson, 25, and Gary Lorenzo Hill Jr., 25, are accused of
killing 30-year-old Brandon Harris after they discovered he had been selling
the men fake marijuana, police said.
Morgan County Circuit Judge Steven Haddock rescheduled a status hearing from
next Monday to Jan. 6 at 9 a.m. to allow attorneys additional time for the
preparation of motions because of the state's decision to seek the death
penalty, court records show.
Anderson's lawyers filed a motion asking the court to rule Alabama's death
penalty unconstitutional because "Alabama statute requires the judge, and not
the jury, to make the ultimate factual findings necessary to impose a death
sentence."
According to an affidavit filed by Decatur Detective Mike Burleson at the time
of Harris' slaying, a shooter or shooters stood outside the vehicle Harris was
sitting in and fired multiple rounds from a 9 mm pistol into the vehicle.
Harris was struck in the back and arm, Burleson said.
Decatur police said they found Harris' body in a Chevy Malibu behind his
girlfriend's residence at 1616 Wadsworth St. S.E. in the early hours of Nov.
13.
A witness told officers he heard multiple gunshots in the alley before seeing
Anderson and Hill return to their vehicle and leave the scene, records show.
Police testified in a March hearing that Hill was seen holding a pistol minutes
before Harris was shot.
Witnesses at the hearing said they never saw Anderson with a gun. Anderson said
in a police statement that he was not in the alley when the shooting occurred.
Anderson is in Morgan County Jail with bail set at $150,000. Hill is in Morgan
County Jail with no bail set.
(source: Decatur Daily)
LOUISIANA:
Court Throws out Conviction in Controversial Death Sentence
The Louisiana Supreme Court on Wednesday threw out the conviction and death
sentence of a man whose case drew national attention to the state's use of the
death penalty.
In its decision , the court said it was sending the case of Rodricus Crawford
back to a lower court for a new trial, citing racial discrimination issues in
the prosecution's picking of jurors.
"I am so thankful that they did the right thing in this case. It was a terrible
tragedy since Day 1, and his conviction was a total injustice and the court
really stepped up and fixed it, and I am looking forward to continuing to work
with the DA's office in order to reach a just outcome," said Cecelia Kappel,
Crawford's attorney.
She said she had spoken to Crawford's family who called the court's decision "a
miracle."
The case put Caddo Parish and former District Attorney Dale Cox in the
spotlight over the use of the death penalty. The Death Penalty Information
Center included Caddo Parish in a 2013 report about how 2 percent of U.S.
counties were responsible for 56 % of the people on death row.
The Crawford case has drawn particular scrutiny, with defense attorneys and
Crawford's supporters arguing there's no proof a crime even occurred.
Crawford was convicted of murdering his 1-year-old son. He told authorities
he'd been sleeping next to his son and woke up to find him unresponsive in
2012. Prosecutors argued that Crawford smothered the boy. But the defense
argued the boy had pneumonia and could have died from natural causes.
Defense attorneys also challenged the prosecution's exclusion of certain
African-American jurors, and in the end the judges tossed out the conviction on
that issue. But Kappel said she was heartened by the fact that some of the
justices wanted to go even further and throw the case out for lack of evidence.
It was not immediately clear what the Caddo Parish district attorney's office
would do next. A new district attorney was elected last year after Cox decided
not to run for election; James E. Stewart became the parish's 1st black DA.
In a statement, Stewart did not say whether he would immediately push for a new
trial. Noting the opinions of justices who wanted to acquit Crawford, Stewart
said he would send it to a new assistant district attorney "...for
re-evaluation of case in order to make a determination of a proper course of
action to proceed forward in this matter."
(source: Associated Press)
******************
Caddo death row inmate to get a new trial
A local man convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death has been
granted a new trial.
Rodricus Crawford was convicted in 2013 of the 1st-degree murder of his 1
year-old son, Roderius Lott.
In September, Cecelia Kappel, an attorney with the Capital Appeals Project,
made arguments on his behalf.
The Louisiana Supreme Court issued an opinion Wednesday in the matter.
Crawford's convictions and sentences have been reversed.
In Kappel's September arguments on Crawford's behalf, she cited several
portions of the case that fell to the high court to review. Examples included
sufficiency of evidence, evidence of innocence and prosecuting attorney Dale
Cox's statement that Jesus Christ himself would impose the death penalty. In
all, 23 assignments of error were raised.
Following Crawford's trial, more evidence was discovered that called the
prosecution's case into question.
In a case that has been cited as entirely circumstantial, Crawford's plight has
drawn attention from the national media. It is 1 of several that allegedly
highlights the high rates of cases resulting in death penalty sentences in
Caddo Parish.
In a statement to The Times, the Caddo Parish District Attorney's office said
the case will be reassigned.
A new assistant district attorney will re-evaluate the case in order to make a
determination on a proper course of action to proceed further in the matter.
"This case has been a tragedy from the start," Kappel said in a statement to
The Times. "We look forward to continuing to work with the Caddo Parish
District Attorney's Office in order to right this injustice."
(source: Shreveport Times)
OKLAHOMA:
Appeals Court Calls the Torture and Botched Execution of an Inmate an "Innocent
Misadventure"
On April 29, 2014, the state of Oklahoma tortured Clayton Lockett to death. An
anonymous executioner, carrying out a death penalty sentence, attempted to
administer a secret 3-drug cocktail, starting with a chemical designed to
render Lockett unconscious. The executioner then added a drug to paralyze
Lockett, and another to stop his heart - both of which would cause a conscious
person immense pain, a sensation of asphyxiation and burning. Unfortunately,
Lockett was conscious: The 1st drug was improperly administered. Lockett tried
to rise up from the table but could only raise his head. "Oh man," he said.
"I'm not ... something's wrong." Then he began to buck and writhe. Prison
officials closed the curtains to hide the scene from witnesses. 30 minutes
later, Lockett was declared dead.
Lockett's family sued Oklahoma and Lockett's executioner for violating
Lockett's Eighth Amendment right to be free from "cruel and unusual
punishments." On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit tossed
out the lawsuit, ruling that Lockett's lengthy torture was not "cruel and
unusual," but rather "an innocent misadventure." The ruling is especially
disturbing on the heels of a decision by the 8th Circuit allowing states to
continue keeping their execution drugs secret. Together, these rulings
effectively guarantee that there will be more botched executions in America -
and that the victims of this torture and their families will have no legal
recourse.
The 10th Circuit rooted its ruling in the fact that "some risk of pain is
inherent in any method of execution," no matter "how humane" it may be. "Simply
put," the court insisted, "the Eighth Amendment does not require the avoidance
of all risk of pain in carrying out executions." Instead, the Constitution
simply forbids "the deliberate infliction of pain for the sake of pain." To
bolster this proposition, the court cited a Supreme Court decision from 1890,
which is almost comically out of step with modern death penalty jurisprudence.
"Everyone acknowledges that Lockett suffered during his execution," the court
then conceded. "But that alone does not make out an Eighth Amendment claim." In
this case, the court concluded, the state had not intentionally tortured
Lockett, but simply embarked upon an "innocent misadventure." This "isolated
mishap" did not violate Lockett's constitutional rights, and his family's
lawsuit must thus be dismissed.
One aspect of the 10th Circuit's reasoning is especially perverse. The
execution apparently went wrong because the execution team selected an
injection site near Lockett's groin, then placed a cloth over the "groin area
... to shield any view of Lockett's naked groin from witnesses." This cloth
interfered with the injection site, partially displacing the IV. The 10th
Circuit dismissed this hugely consequential error with sympathy and admiration
for the executioner. His team, the court explained, "covered Lockett's groin
area" not "to cause Lockett pain," but out of "concerns for Lockett's dignity
and privacy." These concerns, the court insisted, were reasonable, even
commendable - and their ostensible laudability outweighs the fact that they
actually constituted gross negligence that resulted in torture.
Although lethal injection was designed to be a humane alternative to more
gruesome forms of execution, it has proved to be flawed and unreliable. Lethal
injection has the highest rate of botched executions, and when the procedure
goes awry, the agony inflicted on the inmate is indescribably severe. Judge
Alex Kozinski, who serves on the 9th Circuit, has written that "subverting
medicines meant to heal the human body to the opposite purpose was an
enterprise doomed to failure." He has argued earnestly for the return of the
firing squad, which is effective and largely foolproof, declaring:
Sure, firing squads can be messy, but if we are willing to carry out
executions, we should not shield ourselves from the reality that we are
shedding human blood. If we, as a society, cannot stomach the splatter from an
execution carried out by firing squad, then we shouldn't be carrying out
executions at all.
Of course, America could also simply abandon its practice of killing certain
arbitrarily chosen inmates, like virtually every other Western country. It
seems inevitable that the United States will ultimately abolish capital
punishment given its plummeting support. But in the meantime, many voters still
seem to like executions. And with the election of Donald Trump, abolitionists
likely saw their best opportunity for an immediate end to executions - a
liberal Supreme Court majority - go out the window.
(source: slate.com)
_______________________________________________
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
