DOCSLIB.ORG

Death Row U.S.A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Death Row U.S.A DEATH ROW U.S.A. Spring 2018 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Spring 2018 (As of April 1, 2018) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,743 Race of Defendant: White 1,153 (42.03%) Black 1,143 (41.67%) Latino/Latina 366 (13.34%) Native American 27 (0.98%) Asian 53 (1.93%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,688 (97.99%) Female 55 (2.01%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Winter 2018 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Fourth Amendment Byrd v. United States, No. 16-1371 (Driver’s expectation of privacy when not on rental lease of car) (decision below 679 Fed.Appx. 146 (3rd Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: Does a driver have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a rental car when he has the renter's permission to drive the car but is not listed as an authorized driver on the rental agreement? Carpenter v. United States, No. 16-402 (Warrantless cell phone tracking) (decision below 819 F.3d 880 (6th Cir. 2016)) Question Presented: Is the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records revealing the location and movements of a cell phone user over the course of 127 days permitted by the 4th Amendment? Collins v. Virginia, No. 16-1027 (Automobile search exception) (decision below 790 S.E.2d 611 (Va. 2016)) Question Presented: Does the 4th Amendment's automobile exception permit a police officer, uninvited and without a warrant, to enter private property, approach a home, and search a vehicle parked a few feet from the house? District Of Columbia v. Wesby, No. 15–1485 (Probable cause to arrest and qualified immunity of police officers) (decision below 765 F.3d 13 (DC Cir. 2014)) Questions Presented: 1) Do officers have probable cause to arrest under the 4th Amendment when the owner of a vacant home informs police that he has not authorized entry, and may an officer assessing probable cause to arrest those inside for trespassing discredit the suspects' questionable claims of an innocent mental state? 2) Even if there was no probable cause to arrest the apparent trespassers, were the officers entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established in this regard? Decision: The officers were entitled to qualified immunity. They may discredit the assertions of innocence or explanations of those they question based on other circumstances at the time that give rise to suspicion of unlawful activity. Fifth Amendment Hays, Kansas v. Vogt, No. 16-1495 (Use of incriminating statements at probable cause hearing) (decision below 844 F.3d 1235 (10th Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: Is the 5th Amendment violated when incriminating statements are used at a probable cause hearing but not at a criminal trial? Death Row U.S.A. Page 2 Sixth Amendment MCoy v. Louisiana, No.16-8255 (Right to a defense in a capital trial) (decision below 218 So. 3d 535 (La. 2016)) Question Presented: Is it unconstitutional for defense counsel to concede an accused's guilt over the accused's express objection? Eighth Amendment Madison v. Alabama, No. 17-7505 (Execution of person whose cognitive impairments leave him with no memory of the crime or understanding of the circumstances of execution) (decision below cc-1985-001385.80 (11th Cir. 2018)) Questions Presented: 1) Consistent with the 8th Amendment and USSC decisions in Ford and Panetti, may the State execute a prisoner whose mental disability leaves him without memory of his commission of the capital offense? 2) Do evolving standards of decency and the 8th Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment bar the execution of a prisoner whose competency has been compromised by vascular dementia and multiple strokes causing severe cognitive dysfunction and a degenerative medical condition which prevents him from remembering the crime for which he was convicted or understanding the circumstances of his scheduled execution? Fourteenth Amendment Class v. United States, No. 16-424 (Appellate claims that survive a guilty plea) (decision below No. 15-3015 (DC Cir. 2016)) Question Presented: Does a guilty plea inherently waive a defendant's right to challenge the constitutionality of his statute of conviction? Decision: No. A guilty plea does not waive a claim challenging the facial constitutionality of a statue. 2. CASES RAISING HABEAS CORPUS QUESTIONS Ayestas v. Davis, No. 16-6795 (Resources to investigate and develop a claim) (decision below 817 F.3d 888 (5th Cir. 2016)) Question Presented: Did the 5th Circuit err in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 3599(f) withholds "reasonably necessary" resources to investigate and develop an IAC claim that state habeas counsel forfeited, where the claimant's existing evidence does not meet the ultimate burden of proof at the time the § 3599(f) motion is made? Decision: Yes. The 5th Circuit standard for funding (“substantial need”) was more burdensome than the statute allows (“reasonably necessary”). Even if there is an argument that a claim was procedurally defaulted, funds may enable the petitioner to provide evidence that the procedural bar should not be applied. Tharpe v. Sellers, No. 17–6075 (Availability of COA in case where habeas court deferred to state court finding of lack of prejudice, despite strong evidence to the contrary) (decision below Tharpe v. Warden, 2017 WL 4250413, *3 (11th Cir. Sept. 21, 2017)) Question Presented: 1) Could reasonable jurists disagree with the district court’s rejection of Petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion and, accordingly, did the 11th Circuit err in denying a certificate of appealability? 2) Given Petitioner’s credible evidence that a juror voted for the Death Row U.S.A. Page 3 death penalty because he is a “nigger,” did the 11th Circuit err in ruling that he failed to make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)? 3) Did Pena-Rodriguez create a new constitutional claim and, if not, did the lower courts err in denying Petitioner’s motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6)? Decision: In a 6-3 per curiam opinion, the Court held that the 11th Circuit erred in concluding that jurists of reason could not debate whether the petitioner had shown by “clear and convincing” evidence (a juror’s affidavit revealing racist views) that his death sentence was affected by racial prejudice. The Court remanded for reconsideration of the COA request. Wilson v. Sellers, No. 16-6855 (Habeas review of summary state court ruling) (decision below 834 F.3d 1227 (11th Cir. 2016)) Question Presented: Did this Court's decision in Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011), silently abrogate the presumption set forth in Ylst v. Nunnemaker, 501 U.S. 797 (1991) - that a federal court sitting in habeas should "look through" a summary state court ruling to review the last reasoned decision - as a slim majority of the en banc 11th Circuit held in this case, despite the agreement of both parties that the Ylst presumption should continue to apply? 3. CASES RAISING OTHER IMPORTANT FEDERAL QUESTIONS Hughes v. United States, No. 17-155 (Precedent of a 4-1-4 decision) (decision below 849 F.3d 1008 (11th Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: 1) Does the USSC's decision in Marks v. U. S., 430 U.S. 188 (1977), mean that the concurring opinion in a 4-1-4 decision represents the holding of the Court where neither the plurality's reasoning nor the concurrence's reasoning is a logical subset of the other? 2) Under Marks, are the lower courts bound by the 4-Justice plurality opinion in Freeman v. U.S., 564 U.S. 522 (2011), or, instead, by Justice Sotomayor's separate concurring opinion with which all 8 other Justices disagreed? 3) As the 4-Justice plurality in Freeman concluded, is a defendant who enters into a Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement generally eligible for a sentence reduction if there is a later, retroactive amendment to the relevant Guidelines range? Marinello v. United States, No. 16–1144 (Proof of intent for tax obstruction case) (decision below 839 F.3d 209 (2nd Cir. 2016)) Question Presented: Does §7212(a)'s residual clause require that there was a pending IRS action or proceeding, such as an investigation or audit, of which the defendant was aware when he engaged in the purportedly obstructive conduct? Decision: Yes. To convict a defendant under the “Omnibus Clause,” the prosecution must prove that the defendant was aware of a “pending tax-related proceeding, such as a particular investigation or audit,” or “could reasonably foresee that such a proceeding would commence.” Murphy v. Smith, No. 16-1067 (Defendants’ attorney fees in § 1983 suit) (decision below 844 F.3d 653 (7th Cir.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outdoor Market Under Construction
    SPORTS: BASEBALL TEAM STRUGGLES AGAINST UTA, PAGE 10 1 • FOOD: TESTING OUT LITTLE-KNOWN FORT WORTH RESTAURANTS, PAGE 5 Wednesday, April 24, 2002 TCU DAILY SKIFF In its 100th year of service to Texas Christian University • Vol. 99 • Issue 107 • Fort Worth, Texas • www.skiff.tcu.edu Today'sNews Area mom STATE NEWS Outdoor market under construction FORT WORTH — A Tarrant prepares to County assistant district attorney Over $2.3 million in federal, lo- (plants and fresh cut flowers), has resigned after being arrested Workers transform cal and private funds were used to Frost Bites (Italian ice cream), by police who say she was drunk complete the construction of the Coffee Haus (gourmet coffee, deploy with in public and threatened an offi- abandoned building Santa Fe Warehouse built in 1937, desserts and prepared foods), Hot cer's job. Rawie said. Damn Tamales (Mexican pre- The Pulse on Page 2 into city attraction According to the Fort Worth pared foods), GO Texas (a Texas Air Force Public Market Web site, the mar- store that sells Texas gifts) and NATIONALNEWS BY ANTHONY KIRCHNER ket will be split into two parts in- Lone Star Wines, according to the PLACENT1A, Calif. — A Staff Reporter cluding an indoor six-day-a-week Web site. mile-long freight train plowed Construction workers will be venue inside the Santa Fe Ware- The outdoor market will em- 300 Fort Worth head-on into a commuter train working for the next month to fin- house where fresh food vendors phasize retailing fresh food to its during rush hour Tuesday, killing ish transforming an old, abandoned will operate.
    [Show full text]
  • Fictional Documentaries and Truthful Fictions: the Death Penalty in Recent American Film
    FICTIONAL DOCUMENTARIES AND TRUTHFUL FICTIONS: THE DEATH PENALTY IN RECENT AMERICAN FILM David R. Dow* When it comes to death, most Hollywood movies cheat. They cheat by tinkering with the truth, because the truth as it ac­ tually is is too complex or too disturbing to confront honestly. (The so-called happy ending is the most famous form of such cheating.) They cheat because people generally prefer happi­ ness and simplicity to darkness and complexity, especially where their entertainment is concerned, and filmmakers tend to give people what they want. Even great movies cheat. For example, last year's Oscar winner for best picture, American Beauty, cheats egregiously. The movie (for the one or two of you who have not seen it) deals with modern times: It is about suburbia, men and women who mindlessly pursue meaningless careers, bigotry, and finally, hope and redemption. In the end, the character played by Kevin Spacey is murdered. This is not a surprise ending because the Spacey character narrates the movie in a voice-over, and he tells us as the movie opens that in less than a year he will no longer be alive. We know at the beginning that 110 minutes later Kevin Spacey's character will be dead. Spacey plays a morally ambiguous character. He is in the midst of a full-blown mid-life crisis. He is a lousy husband and a worse father. For virtually the entire length of the film, he lusts after his daughter's high school classmate. In the end, however, he gently rebuffs a neighbor's homosexual advance and-again * George Butler Research Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2017 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2017 (As of July 1, 2017) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,817 Race of Defendant: White 1,196 (42.46%) Black 1,168 (41.46%) Latino/Latina 373 (13.24%) Native American 26 (0.92%) Asian 53 (1.88%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,764 (98.12%) Female 53 (1.88%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2017 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 or 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS First Amendment Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194 (Use of websites by sex offender) (decision below 777 S.E.2d 738 (N.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Death Penalty Developments in 2016: the Year in Review
    EMBARGOED UNTIL THURSDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2016, 12:01 AM CDT Texas Death Penalty Developments in 2016: The Year in Review Executive Summary The Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (TCADP) – a statewide advocacy organization based in Austin, Texas – publishes this annual report to inform citizens and elected officials about issues associated with the death penalty during the past year. The report cites these recent death penalty developments in Texas: • In 2016, new death sentences remained at their lowest level since the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state’s revised capital punishment statute in 1976. Jurors condemned three individuals to death, but rejected the death penalty in a fourth case. • Application of the death penalty remains racially biased. Over the last five years, 80% of death sentences have been imposed on people of color. • Use of the death penalty also remains geographically isolated. Just seven counties account for approximately two-thirds of all new death sentences in Texas since 2012. • For the second consecutive year, there were no new death sentences in Harris or Dallas Counties. • The State of Texas put seven people to death in 2016, the lowest number of executions in two decades. Texas accounted for more than one-third of all U.S. executions. • Of the seven men put to death by the State of Texas in 2016, two were Hispanic and five were white. It was the first time since 1984, and only the second year since the resumption of executions in 1982, that no African-Americans were executed in Texas. • Nearly half of the individuals executed by the State of Texas over the last two years had a significant impairment.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad Christopher Q
    Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 2003 Nothing Less than the Dignity of Man: Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad Christopher Q. Cutler Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Criminal Procedure Commons How does access to this work benefit oy u? Let us know! Recommended Citation Christopher Q. Culter, Nothing Less than the Dignity of Man: Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad, 50 Clev. St. L. Rev. 335 (2002-2003) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTHING LESS THAN THE DIGNITY OF MAN: EVOLVING STANDARDS, BOTCHED EXECUTIONS AND UTAH’S CONTROVERSIAL USE OF THE FIRING SQUAD CHRISTOPHER Q. CUTLER1 Human justice is sadly lacking in consolation; it can only shed blood for blood. But we mustn’t ask that it do more than it can.2 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 336 II. HISTORICAL USE OF UTAH’S FIRING SQUAD........................ 338 A. The Firing Squad from Wilderness to Statehood ................................................................. 339 B. From Statehood to Furman ......................................... 347 1. Gary Gilmore to the Present Death Row Crowd ................................................ 357 2. Modern Firing Squad Procedure .......................... 363 III. EIGHTH AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE ................................ 365 A. A History of Pain ......................................................... 366 B. Early Supreme Court Cases......................................... 368 C. Evolving Standards of Decency and the Dignity of Man...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Delaware
    DELAWARE'S D E A T H P E N A L T Y The Facts EXECUTIONS The Delaware Supreme Court struck DESPITE CLAIMS OF down the death sentencing statute in INNOCENCE 2016. The first clemency in state history was granted in Robert Jackson was executed 2012. for murder in 2011, while his Delaware was the first state to abolish accomplice Anthony Lachette was released from prison in the death penalty in 1958, but in 1961 1996 after serving his sentence the legislature overrode the governor’s after pleading guilty to veto and reinstated the death penalty. burglary and conspiracy. In 1974, the Delaware legislature Directly before his execution, passed a law declaring the death Jackson implied that Lachette was the one responsible for penalty the mandatory sentencing the murder. for cases of first degree murder. In 1986, the method of execution changed from hanging to lethal injection and the gallows were disassembled in 2003, eliminating the possibility of death by hanging. LETHAL INJECTION Delaware’s Bishop Stands Against the Billy Bailey, sentenced to Reinstatement of Death Penalty death in 1980, chose to be executed by hanging rather than lethal injection because Bishop Francis Malooly of the Diocese of Wilmington, Delaware he did not want to be treated wrote the following in response to a “like a dog put to sleep.” legislative movement to reinstate the death penalty: “The true question at the heart of this issue is whether or not the death penalty is a just and necessary method of punishment. Pope Francis has called for the worldwide abolition of
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Liberty and the Common Good - the Balance: Prayer, Capital Punishment, Abortion
    The Catholic Lawyer Volume 20 Number 3 Volume 20, Summer 1974, Number 3 Article 5 Individual Liberty and the Common Good - The Balance: Prayer, Capital Punishment, Abortion Brendan F. Brown Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Constitutional Law Commons This Pax Romana Congress Papers is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Catholic Lawyer by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND THE COMMON GOOD-THE BALANCE: PRAYER, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, ABORTION BRENDAN F. BROWN* In striking the balance between individual freedom and the common good of society, judges are relying "on ideology or policy preference more than on legislative intent."' Professor Jude P. Dougherty, President-elect of the American Catholic Philosophical Association, has declared that "this is particulary apparent in actions of the United States Supreme Court where the envisaged effects of a decision are often given more weight than the intentions of the framers of the Constitution or of the legislators who passed the law under consideration."' The dominant trend of the United States judiciary is to begin its reasoning with "liberty" or "free- dom" as the ultimate moral value in the Franco-American sense of maxi- mum individual self-assertion, and then to maximize it. It will be the purpose of this paper to show that "liberty" or "freedom" is only an instrumental moral value, and that by treating it otherwise, the courts are damaging the common good of society.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matthew E
    University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 37 Article 6 Issue 1 Fall 2007 2007 Comments: The rC ime, the Case, the Killer Cocktail: Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matthew E. Feinberg University of Baltimore School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Feinberg, Matthew E. (2007) "Comments: The rC ime, the Case, the Killer Cocktail: Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 37: Iss. 1, Article 6. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol37/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CRIME, THE CASE, THE KILLER COCKTAIL: WHY MARYLAND'S CAPITAL PUNISHMENT PROCEDURE CONSTITUTES CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT I. INTRODUCTION "[D]eath is different ...." I It is this principle that establishes the death penalty as one of the most controversial topics in legal history, even when implemented only for the most heinous criminal acts. 2 In fact, "[n]o aspect of modern penal law is subjected to more efforts to influence public attitudes or to more intense litigation than the death penalty.,,3 Over its long history, capital punishment has changed in many ways as a result of this litigation and continues to spark controversy at the very mention of its existence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Culture of Capital Punishment in Japan David T
    MIGRATION,PALGRAVE ADVANCES IN CRIMINOLOGY DIASPORASAND CRIMINAL AND JUSTICE CITIZENSHIP IN ASIA The Culture of Capital Punishment in Japan David T. Johnson Palgrave Advances in Criminology and Criminal Justice in Asia Series Editors Bill Hebenton Criminology & Criminal Justice University of Manchester Manchester, UK Susyan Jou School of Criminology National Taipei University Taipei, Taiwan Lennon Y.C. Chang School of Social Sciences Monash University Melbourne, Australia This bold and innovative series provides a much needed intellectual space for global scholars to showcase criminological scholarship in and on Asia. Refecting upon the broad variety of methodological traditions in Asia, the series aims to create a greater multi-directional, cross-national under- standing between Eastern and Western scholars and enhance the feld of comparative criminology. The series welcomes contributions across all aspects of criminology and criminal justice as well as interdisciplinary studies in sociology, law, crime science and psychology, which cover the wider Asia region including China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Macao, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam. More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14719 David T. Johnson The Culture of Capital Punishment in Japan David T. Johnson University of Hawaii at Mānoa Honolulu, HI, USA Palgrave Advances in Criminology and Criminal Justice in Asia ISBN 978-3-030-32085-0 ISBN 978-3-030-32086-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32086-7 This title was frst published in Japanese by Iwanami Shinsho, 2019 as “アメリカ人のみた日本 の死刑”. [Amerikajin no Mita Nihon no Shikei] © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Deatii ROW U.SA
    ! DEATiiROW U.SA Spring2000 A quarlerllJ report blJ the Capital Punishment Project 0£the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. • Director of Research and Student Services, Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund TOTAL NUMBER OF DEA TH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF : . 3,670 Race of Defendant: White 1,698 (46.27%) Black 1,574 (42.89%,) Latino/Latina 321 ( 8.75%) Native American 46 ( 1.25%) Asian 31 ( .84%) Unknown at this issue 0 ( 0%) Gender: Male 3,615 (98.50%) Female 55 ( 1.50%) Juveniles: Male 69 ( 1.88%) DISPOSffiONS SINCE JANUARY 1, 1973: Executions : 625 Suicides: 54 Commutations : 90 (includingthose by the Governorof Texas resulting from favorable court decisions) Died of natural causes or killed while under death sentence: 165 Convictions/Sentences reversed : 1710 JURISDICTIONS WITH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STA TOTES : 40 (Underlinedjurisdiction has statute but no sentencesimposed) Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland,Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania,South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington.,Wyoming, U.S. Government,U .S. Military . JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTES : 13 Alaska, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa. Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan.,Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont,West Virginia, Wisconsin. Death Row U.SA Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Winter 2000 Issue of October Term 1999 Cases (as of May 5, 2000) Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Fourth Amendment Bond v.
    [Show full text]
  • Execution Ritual : Media Representations of Execution and the Social Construction of Public Opinion Regarding the Death Penalty
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2011 Execution ritual : media representations of execution and the social construction of public opinion regarding the death penalty. Emilie Dyer 1987- University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Recommended Citation Dyer, Emilie 1987-, "Execution ritual : media representations of execution and the social construction of public opinion regarding the death penalty." (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 388. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/388 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXECUTION RITUAL: MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF EXECUTION AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING THE DEATH PENALTY By Emilie Dyer B.A., University of Louisville, 2009 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Sociology University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky May, 2011 -------------------------------------------------------------- EXECUTION RITUAL : MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF EXECUTION AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING THE DEATH PENALTY By Emilie Brook Dyer B.A., University of Louisville, 2009 A Thesis Approved on April 11, 2011 by the following Thesis Committee: Thesis Director (Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • No Longer on Indiana's Death
    NO LONGER ON INDIANA’S DEATH ROW According to records available to the Indiana Public Defender Council, ninety-seven individuals have been sentenced to death in Indiana since the 1977 reinstatement of capital punishment here. Eighty-nine individuals, listed below, are no longer on death row, including twenty-two individuals who have been executed (20 by Indiana and 2 by other states), six who died while on death-row, and fifty-nine who have had their death sentences set aside. Eight individuals are currently under sentence of death. Name Year Sentenced Status to Death Hicks, Larry 1978 New trial granted by trial court, two weeks before scheduled execution; acquitted on retrial, 11/20/1980. Judy, Steven 1980 Executed, March 9, 1981, after waiving non-mandatory appeals. Hollis, David 1982 Suicide while awaiting appeal. Dillon, Richard 1981 New trial ordered on federal habeas, Dillon v. Duckworth, 751 F.2d 895 (7th Cir. 1984);Pled to term of years pending retrial. Vandiver, William 1984 Executed, October 16, 1985, after waiving all non-mandatory appeals. Thompson, Jay 1982 Death vacated on direct appeal; remanded for new judge sentencing based on jury recommendation against death, Thompson v. State, 492 N.E.2d 264 (1986); resentenced to sixty years. Patton, Keith 1984 Guilty plea vacated on state PCR, Patton v. State, 517 N.E.2d 374 (1987). Sentenced to 120 years at Trial, 3/17/1990. Martinez-Chavez, 1985 Death vacated on direct appeal; Indiana Eladio Supreme Court orders sixty year sentence imposed. Martinez-Chavez v. State, 534 N.E.2d 731 (1989). Cooper, Paula 1986 Death vacated on direct appeal; Indiana Supreme Court orders sixty year 1 sentence imposed, Cooper v.
    [Show full text]