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 2020 A quarterly report by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins Consultant to the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Spring 2020 (As of April 1, 2020) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2603 (2,603 – 183* - 897M = 1523 enforceable sentences) Race of Defendant: White 1,099 (42.22%) Black 1,077 (41.38%) Latinx 352 (13.52%) Native American 27 (1.04%) Asian 47 (1.81%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,550 (97.96%) Female 53 (2.04%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 30 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, CaliforniaM, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, OregonM, PennsylvaniaM, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. M States where a moratorium prohibiting execution has been imposed by the Governor. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 23 Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire [see note below], New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Hampshire repealed the death penalty prospectively. The man already sentenced remains under sentence of death.] * Designates the number of people in non-moratorium states who are not under active death sentence because of court reversal but whose sentence may be reimposed. M Designates the number of people in states where a gubernatorial moratorium on execution has been imposed. Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Winter 2020 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2019 or 2020 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Fourth Amendment Kansas v. Glover, No. 18-556 (Vehicle stop, reasonable suspicion) (decision below 422 P.3d 64 (Kan. 2018)) Question Presented: For purposes of an investigative stop under the 4th Amendment is it reasonable for an officer to suspect that the registered owner of a vehicle is the one driving the vehicle absent any information to the contrary? Torres v. Madrid, No.19-292 (Parameter of “seizure”) (decision below 769 Fed.Appx. 654 (10th Cir. 2019)) Question Presented: Is an unsuccessful attempt to detain a suspect by use of physical force a "seizure" within the meaning of the 4th Amendment, as the 8th, 9th, and 11th Circuits and the New Mexico Supreme Court hold, or must physical force be successful in detaining a suspect to constitute a "seizure," as the 10th Circuit and the D.C. Court of Appeals hold? Sixth Amendment Ramos v. Louisiana, No 18-5924 (Unanimous verdict guarantee) (decision below 231 So.3d 44 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: Does the 14th Amendment fully incorporate the 6th Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict? Eighth Amendment Jones v. Mississippi, No. 18-1259 (Juvenile LWOP decisions) (decision below 2015-CT-00899- SCT Miss. 2018) Question Presented: Does the 8th Amendment require the sentencing authority to make a finding that a juvenile is permanently incorrigible before imposing a sentence of life without parole? Kahler v. Kansas, No.18-6135 (Insanity defense) (decision below 410 P.3d 105 (Kan. 2018)) Question Presented: Do the 8th and 14th Amendments permit a state to abolish the insanity defense? Decision: The Court finds that Kansas has not abolished the insanity defense, because it allows defendants to argue that mental illness prevented them from forming the criminal intent required for conviction of the crime. Due process does not require that the state also allow defendants to argue a lack of capacity to distinguish right from wrong. The Court will defer to states to develop their own rules on mental health defenses, an area in which science is evolving. Mathena v. Malvo, No. 18-217 (Interpretation of retroactivity decision) (decision below 893 F.3d 265 (4th Cir. 2018)) Question Presented: Did the 4th Circuit err in concluding -- in direct conflict with Virginia's highest court and other courts -- that a decision of this Court (Montgomery v. Death Row U.S.A. Page 2 Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016)), addressing whether a new constitutional rule announced in an earlier decision (Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012)), applies retroactively on collateral review may properly be interpreted as modifying and substantively expanding the very rule whose retroactivity was in question? Decision: Dismissed by stipulation in light of state law making juveniles parole eligible. McKinney v. Arizona, No. 18-1109 (Application of capital law and resentencing) (decision below 426 P.3d 1204 (Ariz. 2018)) Question Presented: 1) Was the Arizona Supreme Court required to apply current law when weighing mitigating and aggravating evidence to determine whether a death sentence is warranted? 2) Does the correction of error under Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982), require resentencing? Decision: An appellate court on collateral review may choose a new sentence after a finding of an Eddings error at trial, just as in Clemons the Court held that an appellate court may choose a sentence after deleting an aggravating circumstance. Both are deemed “reweighing” of the circumstances, akin to review for “harmless error,” and not an imposition of sentence. Clemons was not overruled by Ring or Hurst, which are described as holding merely that the jury must decide on aggravating facts that could lead to a death sentence, not that a jury must make the ultimate sentencing decision. The original sentence in this case pre-dated Ring, and Ring is held not to apply to the appellate court decision because it is not a reopening of the direct appeal but a collateral review. Fourteenth Amendment Ramos v. Louisiana, No 18-5924 (Unanimous verdict guarantee) (decision below 231 So.3d 44 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: Does the 14th Amendment fully incorporate the 6th Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict? 2. CASES RAISING HABEAS CORPUS QUESTIONS Banister v. Davis, No. 18-6943 (Successive habeas petition) (decision below 5/8/2018 CTA 5 ORDER) Question Presented (By the Court): Whether and under what circumstances should a timely Rule 59 (e) motion be recharacterized as a second or successive habeas petition under Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524 (2005)? 3. CASES RAISING OTHER IMPORTANT FEDERAL QUESTIONS Borden v. United States, No. 19-5410 (Scope of ACCA crimes) (decision below 769 Fed.Appx. 266 (6th Cir. 2019)) Question Presented: 1. Does the "use of force" clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i) encompass crimes with a mens rea of mere recklessness? Brownback v. King, No. 19-546 (Interplay of FTCA and Bivens) (decision below 917 F.3d 409 (6th Cir. 2019)) Question Presented: Does a final judgment in favor of the US in an action brought under § 1346(b)(1) [Federal Tort Claims Act], on the ground that a private person would not be liable to the claimant under state tort law for the injuries alleged, bar a claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), that is brought by Death Row U.S.A. Page 3 the same claimant, based on the same injuries, and against the same governmental employees whose acts gave rise to the claimant's FTCA claim? Carpenter v. Murphy, No. 17-1107 (Jurisdiction, “Indian reservation”) (decision below 875 F.3d 896 (10th Cir. 2017)) Question Presented: Do the 1866 territorial boundaries of the Creek Nation within the former Indian Territory of eastern Oklahoma constitute an "Indian reservation" today under 18 U.S.C. § 1151 (a)? Davis v. United States, No. 19–5421 (5th Circuit rule on reviewing “unpreserved” factual claims) (decision below No. 18-10748 (5th Cir. 2019)) Question Presented: Is factual error categorically immune from plain error review? Decision: In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that “there is no legal basis for the 5th Circuit’s practice of declining to review certain unpreserved factual arguments for plain error.” Hernandez v. Mesa, No. 17-1678 (Bivens claim against “rogue” federal officer) (decision below 885 F.3d 811 (5th Cir. 2018)) Question Presented: When plaintiffs plausibly allege that a rogue federal law enforcement officer violated clearly established 4th and 5th Amendment rights for which there is no alternative legal remedy, can and should the federal courts recognize a damages claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)? Decision: Bivens does not extend to cross-border shootings. The victim was on the Mexico side of the border, while the shooter was on the U.S. side. The Court declines to extend Bivens to cases that might implicate foreign relations and border security. It is up to Congress to make such a decision. Holguin-Hernandez v. United States, No. 18-7739 (Necessity of formal objection for “reasonableness review” of sentence) (decision below 746 Fed.Appx. 403 (5th Cir. 2018)) Question Presented: Is a formal objection after pronouncement of sentence necessary to invoke appellate reasonableness review of the length of a defendant's sentence? Decision: No. Defendant’s argument for a lesser punishment before pronouncement of sentence suffices to preserve the issue of length of sentence for appellate review. McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526 (State court jurisdiction in “Indian Country”) (decision below pc-2018-1057 (OK CCA 2019)) Question Presented: Can Oklahoma courts continue to unlawfully exercise, under state law, criminal jurisdiction as "justiciable matter" in Indian Country over Indians accused of major crimes enumerated under the Indian Major Crimes Act - which are under exclusive federal jurisdiction? Walker v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Read Our Full Report, Death in Florida, Now
    USA DEATH IN FLORIDA GOVERNOR REMOVES PROSECUTOR FOR NOT SEEKING DEATH SENTENCES; FIRST EXECUTION IN 18 MONTHS LOOMS Amnesty International Publications First published on 21 August 2017 by Amnesty International Publications International Secretariat Peter Benenson House 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org Copyright Amnesty International Publications 2017 Index: AMR 51/6736/2017 Original Language: English Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publishers. Amnesty International is a global movement of 3 million people in more than 150 countries and territories, who campaign on human rights. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. We research, campaign, advocate and mobilize to end abuses of human rights. Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. Our work is largely financed by contributions from our membership and donations Table of Contents Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1 ‘Bold, positive change’ not allowed ................................................................................
    [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]
  • UNITED STATES of AMERICA the Execution of Mentally Ill Offenders
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The execution of mentally ill offenders I cannot believe that capital punishment is a solution – to abolish murder by murdering, an endless chain of murdering. When I heard that my daughter’s murderer was not to be executed, my first reaction was immense relief from an additional torment: the usual catastrophe, breeding more catastrophe, was to be stopped – it might be possible to turn the bad into good. I felt with this man, the victim of a terrible sickness, of a demon over which he had no control, might even help to establish the reasons that caused his insanity and to find a cure for it... Mother of 19-year-old murder victim, California, November 1960(1) Today, at 6pm, the State of Florida is scheduled to kill my brother, Thomas Provenzano, despite clear evidence that he is mentally ill.... I have to wonder: Where is the justice in killing a sick human being? Sister of death row inmate, June 2000(2) I’ve got one thing to say, get your Warden off this gurney and shut up. I am from the island of Barbados. I am the Warden of this unit. People are seeing you do this. Final statement of Monty Delk, mentally ill man executed in Texas on 28 February 2002 Overview: A gap in the ‘evolving standards of decency’ The underlying rationale for prohibiting executions of the mentally retarded is just as compelling for prohibiting executions of the seriously mentally ill, namely evolving standards of decency. Indiana Supreme Court Justice, September 2002(3) On 30 May 2002, a jury in Maryland sentenced Francis Zito to death.
    [Show full text]
  • THE OVERVIEW; Divisive Case of a Killer of Two Ends As Texas
    EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW; Divisive Case of a Killer of Two Ends as... Page 1 of 5 EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW;Divisive Case of a Killerof Two Ends as TexasExecutes Tucker By Sam Howe Verhovek Feb.4, 1998 See the article in its original context from February 4, 1998, Section A, Page 1 Buy Reprints VIEW ON TIMESMACHl�E TimesMachine is an exclusive benefit for home deliveryand digital subscribers. Saying "I love all of you very much" and smiling as lethal chemicals were pumped into her body, Karla Faye Tucker was executed tonight in Texas, becoming the first woman put to death by the state since the Civil War. The execution ended a case that attracted an extraordinary amount of attention around the world and led to fierce debate about redemption on death row. The prospect of executing a woman clearly exposed a societal raw nerve, but it also prompted many death-penalty supporters to insist that Ms. Tucker had gained undeserved sympathy because of her sex and her doe-eyed good looks. Ms. Tucker, 38, who murdered two people with a pickax in Houston 15 years ago, came to be known recently, through relentless media coverage of her death row interviews, as a soft-spoken, gentle-looking, born-again Christian pleading for mercy. But her final appeals to the Supreme Court and to Gov. George W. Bush for a reprieve were denied today. She became the second woman executed in the United States since the Supreme Court allowed the death penalty to resume, in 1976.
    [Show full text]
  • North Carolina Law Review March, 1996 *731
    74 NCLR 731 FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY Page 1 74 N.C. L. Rev. 731 (Cite as: 74 N.C. L. Rev. 731) North Carolina Law Review March, 1996 *731 NOVEL THEORIES OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE BASED UPON THE TOXICITY OF THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT: URBAN PSYCHOSIS, TELEVISION INTOXICATION, AND BLACK RAGE Patricia J. Falk [FNa] Copyright © 1996 North Carolina Law Review Association; Patricia J. Falk Criminal defendants increasingly claim that their criminal behavior was caused by social toxins that excuse or mitigate their guilt. In this Article, Professor Falk demonstrates that these claims are not aberrational doctrinal proposals, but rather are sophisticated extensions of existing criminal doctrine commensurate with scientific advancements. Unlike prevalent short- term causal explanations for criminal behavior, these novel extensions serve to elucidate long-term, diffuse effects of social toxins on the human psyche. In so doing, they provide otherwise unavailable insight into criminal behavior. Professor Falk urges the legal community to meaningfully consider these valuable new windows into the criminal mind, rather than fall prey to the common pitfall of reflexive "abuse excuse" rhetoric. Introduction ........................................................ 733 I. The Cases: Urban Psychosis, Television Intoxication, and Black Rage as Theories of Criminal Defense ................................... 738 A. Urban Psychosis ................................................ 738 1. Urban Psychosis .............................................. 738 2. Urban Survival
    [Show full text]
  • Of Contemporary Popular Music
    Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law Volume 11 Issue 2 Issue 2 - Winter 2009 Article 2 2009 The "Spiritual Temperature" of Contemporary Popular Music Tracy Reilly Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Tracy Reilly, The "Spiritual Temperature" of Contemporary Popular Music, 11 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 335 (2020) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol11/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The "Spiritual Temperature" of Contemporary Popular Music: An Alternative to the Legal Regulation of Death-Metal and Gangsta-Rap Lyrics Tracy Reilly* ABSTRACT The purpose of this Article is to contribute to the volume of legal scholarship that focuses on popular music lyrics and their effects on children. This interdisciplinary cross-section of law and culture has been analyzed by legal scholars, philosophers, and psychologists throughout history. This Article specifically focuses on the recent public uproar over the increasingly violent and lewd content of death- metal and gangsta-rap music and its alleged negative influence on children. Many legal scholars have written about how legal and political efforts throughout history to regulate contemporary genres of popular music in the name of the protection of children's morals and well-being have ultimately been foiled by the proper judicial application of solid First Amendment free-speech principles.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Winter 2014 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. Winter 2014 (As of January 1, 2014) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 3,070 Race of Defendant: White 1,323 (43.09%) Black 1,284 (41.82%) Latino/Latina 388 (12.64%) Native American 30 (0.98%) Asian 44 (1.43%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.03%) Gender: Male 3,010 (98.05%) Female 60 (1.95%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 34 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, 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: 19 Alaska, Connecticut [see note below], District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland [see note below], Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: Connecticut, Maryland and New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced in each state remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Fall 2013 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases Decided or to Be Decided in October Term 2012 or 2013 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chronicle
    Friday November 2, 1984 Volume 80B, Number 49 Duke University Durham, North Carolina THE CHRONICLE Newsfile Barfield executed in Raleigh ShOOt On Sight: Army troops entered nine Indian cities including New Delhi to quell a nationwide wave of lynchings and arson that began soon after the RALEIGH - Velma Barfield, convicted in 1978 of the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Soldiers poisoning death of her boyfriend, became the first woman were ordered to shoot rioters on sight. Unofficial tallies executed in 22 years in the United States when she died indicated more than 150 people have been killed and early Friday in North Carolina's death chamber. 1,000 injured since Wednesday. See page 2. "I want to say that I am sorry for all the hurt that I have caused," said Barfield in her last statement. Gandhi in State: Indira Gandhi's body was on "I know that everybody has gone through a lot of pain, view in the doorway of what was once her father's house all the families connected and I am sorry, and I am sorry in New Delhi. Thousands of Indians, mostly young men, and I want to thank everybody who have been supporting filed by, peering at the body, which was strewn with me all these six years. white flowers. _ want to thank my family for standing with me through all this and my attorneys and all the support to me, STAFF AND WIRE PHOTOS everybody, the people with the Prison Department. I ap­ Talks no help: Seven American-Nicaraguantalks Anne Jenns of Raleigh Thursday protested the execution preciate everything, their kindness and everything they in Mexico have failed to narrow major differences bet­ of Velma Barfield, which occurred at 2 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Episode 13: Women Hello and Welcome to the Death Penalty
    Episode 13: Women Hello and welcome to the Death Penalty Information Center’s series of podcasts, exploring issues related to capital punishment. In this edition, we will be discussing women and the death penalty. Have women always been represented on death row in the United States? When was the first woman executed? Yes, in theory women have always been eligible for the death penalty in the United States, though they have been executed far less often than men. The first woman executed in what is now the U.S. was Jane Champion, in 1632. She received the death penalty in Virginia for murder. The first woman executed in the modern era of the death penalty was Velma Barfield. She was given a lethal injection in North Carolina in 1984. Do death penalty laws treat men and women differently? No. The laws are written in a gender-neutral way. However, the federal government forbids the execution of a woman who is pregnant. The U.S. has also ratified a treaty with a similar provision. In some countries, criminal laws are specifically written to affect women and men differently. What percentage of death row inmates are women? What percentage of executions involve women? As of October 31, 2010, there were 55 women on death row. They made up 1.7% of all death row inmates. In all of American history, there have only been 569 documented executions of women, out of over 15,000 total executions. Since 1976, twelve women have been executed, accounting for about 1% of executions during that time.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Fall 2020 A quarterly report by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins Consultant to the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Fall 2020 (As of October 1, 2020) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2553 (2553 – 180* - 877M = 1496 enforceable sentences) Race of Defendant: White 1,076 (42.15%) Black 1,062 (41.60%) Latino/Latina 343 (13.44%) Native American 24 (0.94%) Asian 47 (1.84%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,502 (98.00%) Female 51 (2.00%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 30 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, CaliforniaM, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, OregonM, PennsylvaniaM, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. M States where a moratorium prohibiting execution has been imposed by the Governor. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 23 Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire [see note below], New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Hampshire repealed the death penalty prospectively. The man already sentenced remains under sentence of death.] * Designates the number of people in non-moratorium states who are not under active death sentence because of court reversal but whose sentence may be reimposed. M Designates the number of people in states where a gubernatorial moratorium on execution has been imposed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death of Punishment: Searching for Justice Among the Worst of the Worst
    The Death of Punishment: Searching for Justice Among the Worst of the Worst By Robert Blecker, Palgrave MacMillan, N.Y., 314 pages, $28 hardcover. Jeffrey Kirchmeier , New York Law Journal May 12, 2014 When Oklahoma recently botched the lethal injection of a condemned man, death penalty opponents decried the execution as inhumane. While many death penalty advocates also criticized the procedural mistakes, some people argued that the man's horrible crime justified his agony. Throughout history, humans have debated how much suffering governments should inflict on criminals, and in his new book, "The Death of Punishment: Searching for Justice Among the Worst of the Worst," New York Law School Professor Robert Blecker explores the role of retribution in the criminal justice system. While arguing that our system should be more grounded in retributive theories, he concludes that the United States both under-punishes some crimes and over-punishes others. In "The Death of Punishment," Blecker critiques a system that focuses on housing criminals as a way of punishing and preventing crime. He reasons that society gives too little weight to retributive goals of sentencing, arguing that our anger at horrible crimes justifies more severe punishments. As an advocate for the death penalty, he asserts that egregious murderers should suffer a painful, but quick, death. He prefers the firing squad to lethal injection because the former looks like punishment, not a medical procedure. Further, he complains that prisons house people in too much comfort when prisons should be punitive institutions of suffering where inmates are constantly reminded of their victims in an unpleasant environment with tasteless food.
    [Show full text]