DOCSLIB.ORG

Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process Carolina Academic Press Law Casebook Series Advisory Board ❦

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process Carolina Academic Press Law Casebook Series Advisory Board ❦ Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process Carolina Academic Press Law Casebook Series Advisory Board ❦ Gary J. Simson, Chairman Cornell Law School Raj K. Bhala The George Washington University Law School John C. Coffee, Jr. Columbia University School of Law Randall Coyne University of Oklahoma Law Center John S. Dzienkowski University of Texas School of Law Paul Finkelman University of Tulsa College of Law Robert M. Jarvis Shepard Broad Law Center Nova Southeastern University Vincent R. Johnson St. Mary’s University School of Law Thomas G. Krattenmaker Director of Research Federal Communications Commission Michael A. Olivas University of Houston Law Center Michael P. Scharf New England School of Law Peter M. Shane Dean, University of Pittsburgh School of Law Emily L. Sherwin University of San Diego School of Law John F. Sutton, Jr. University of Texas School of Law David B. Wexler University of Arizona College of Law Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process Second Edition Randall Coyne Professor of Law University of Oklahoma Lyn Entzeroth Law Clerk to Federal Magistrate Judge Bana Roberts Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina Copyright © 2001 by Randall Coyne and Lyn Entzeroth All Rights Reserved. ISBN: 0-89089-726-3 LCCN: 2001092360 Carolina Academic Press 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com Printed in the United States of America Summary Table of Contents Table of Contents ix Table of Cases xxiii Table of Prisoners xxix List of Web Addresses xxxiii Preface to the Second Edition xxxv Preface to First Edition xxxvii Acknowledgments xxxix Chapter 1. The Great Debate Over Capital Punishment 3 A. Introduction 3 B. A Historical Summary 3 C. Selecting Those Deserving of Death 7 D. To Kill or Not to Kill . For and Against the Death Penalty 13 E. The Debate Over Deterrence and Retribution 25 F. Other Issues in the Death Penalty Debate 32 Chapter 2. Eighth Amendment Prohibition Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment 51 A. Introduction to the Eighth Amendment 51 B. Proportionality as a Limitation on Punishment 53 C. The Importance of State Constitutional Law 72 D. Evolving Standards of Decency 77 E. Modern Methods of Execution 81 F. Death Penalty Jurisdictions and Racial Characteristics of Death Row Populations 108 Chapter 3. Early Constitutional Challenges to the Death Penalty 117 A. Procedural Due Process 117 B. Cruel and Unusual Punishment 122 C. Post-Furman Death Penalty Statutes 129 D. Summary of the 1976 Supreme Court Cases Applying the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to Post-Furman Death Penalty Statutes 143 E. Model Penal Code § 210.6 169 Chapter 4. Race, Gender and Sexual Orientation 173 A. Prosecutorial Discretion 173 B. The Effects of Race 175 C. The Effects of Gender 205 D. Is Sexual Orientation Relevant in Capital Cases? 217 v vi SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 5. Constitutional Limitations on Death Eligibility 221 A. Mens Rea 221 B. Age of the Offender 238 C. Insanity 255 D. Mental Retardation 268 E. Double Jeopardy Aspects of Capital Punishment 280 Chapter 6. Selecting the Capital Jury 283 A. Overview 283 B. Death Qualification 284 C. Fair Cross-Section Requirement 299 D. Racial Bias and Jury Selection 304 E. Race-Based Peremptory Challenges 308 Chapter 7. The Role of Aggravating Circumstances 329 A. Selected Death Penalty Statutes 329 B. Vagueness as a Constitutional Defect 341 C. Unauthorized Aggravating Circumstances 355 D. Nonstatutory Aggravating Circumstances 364 E. The Narrowing Function of Aggravating Circumstances 367 F. Victim Impact Evidence 371 Chapter 8. The Role of Mitigating Circumstances 389 A. General Principles of Mitigation 389 B. Balancing Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances 430 Chapter 9. The Sentencing Phase of Capital Cases 447 A. Introduction 447 B. Presentence Investigation Reports 450 C. Use of Criminal Convictions as Aggravating Evidence 454 D. The “Truly Awesome Responsibility” of Capital Jurors 459 E. Closing Arguments and Fundamental Fairness 471 F. Lesser Included Offense Instructions 484 G. Life Without Parole Instructions 489 H. Special Problems of Volunteers 515 Chapter 10. Use of Psychiatric Experts in Capital Cases 527 A. Introduction 527 B. Predicting Future Dangerousness 527 C. Fifth and Sixth Amendment Issues 534 D. Harmless Error 540 E. The Right to a Court-Appointed Psychiatrist 546 Chapter 11. Assistance of Counsel 555 A. Introduction 555 B. The Constitutional Standard of Effective Assistance of Counsel 560 C. Conflict of Interest 580 D. Failure to Investigate 584 E. Effective Assistance of Counsel in Capital Sentencing Proceedings 588 SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS vii F. Direct Appeal 607 G. Fatal Consequences of Attorney Error 617 Chapter 12. Stays of Execution and State Post-Conviction Relief Proceedings 623 A. Stays of Execution 623 B. State Post-Conviction Proceedings 636 Chapter 13. Introduction to Federal Habeas Corpus Review 661 A. Historical Overview 661 B. Policy Considerations 664 C. The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 669 D. Other Limitations on Federal Habeas Review 691 E. The Role of Innocence in Federal Habeas Corpus 694 Chapter 14. State Barriers to Federal Habeas Review 707 A. Exhaustion of State Remedies 707 B. Procedural Bar —Introduction 715 C. Cause and Prejudice Requirement 716 D. What Constitutes Cause 724 E. Inadvertent Error Does Not Constitute Cause 730 F. Procedural Default as Ineffective Assistance 734 G. Adequate and Independent State Grounds 740 H. Evidentiary Hearings in Federal Habeas Corpus 757 I. Evidentiary Hearings under the AEDPA—Section 2254(e) 760 Chapter 15. Retroactivity 769 Chapter 16. Presumption of Correctness 799 A. State Court Findings of Fact: 28 U.S.C. Section 2254(d) 799 B. Federal Court Review of State Court’s Application of Law to Specific Facts 804 Chapter 17. Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions, Abuse of the Writ, and Clemency 811 A. Successive Petitions and Abusing the Writ (Pre-AEDPA) 811 B. Successive Petitions and Abuse of the Writ under the AEDPA 826 C. Clemency 838 Chapter 18. The Federal Death Penalty 845 A. Historical Summary of the Federal Death Penalty 845 B. Selected Statutes and Cases 851 Chapter 19. International Law and the Death Penalty 933 A. International Restrictions on Capital Punishment 933 B. Selected Cases 939 C. Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries 983 Appendix A 993 Appendix B 997 Index 1005 Table of Contents Table of Cases xxiii Table of Prisoners xxix List of Web Addresses xxxiii Preface to the Second Edition xxxv Preface to First Edition xxxvii Acknowledgments xxxix Chapter 1. The Great Debate Over Capital Punishment 3 A. Introduction 3 B. A Historical Summary 3 Note on Public Opinion Polls and Support for Capital Punishment 6 C. Selecting Those Deserving of Death 7 Bruck, Decisions of Death 7 Olszewski, New Theory About What Makes a Murderer 11 D. To Kill or Not to Kill . For and Against the Death Penalty 13 van den Haag,The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense 13 Note 18 Greenberg, Against the American System of Capital Punishment 19 E. The Debate Over Deterrence and Retribution 25 1. Overview of Deterrence 25 2. Brutalization 26 3. Publicizing Executions 28 Note 30 4. Overview of Retribution 31 Notes and Question 32 F. Other Issues in the Death Penalty Debate 32 1. Risk of Executing the Innocent 32 Note on DNA Exonerations 34 2. Error Rates in Capital Cases: The Liebman Study 36 3. Comparative Cost 37 Note and Questions on Compensating the Wrongfully Condemned 42 4. Religion 42 5. The Moratorium Movement 45 United States v.Burns 46 Note on the American Bar Association’s Call for a Moratorium on Executions 48 ix x TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 2. Eighth Amendment Prohibition Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment 51 A. Introduction to the Eighth Amendment 51 Granucci, “Nor Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted:” ` The Original Meaning 52 Notes 53 B. Proportionality as a Limitation on Punishment 53 Coker v. Georgia 54 Note 57 Solem v. Helm 57 Harmelin v.Michigan 62 Note 67 Michigan v.Bullock Michigan v.Hasson 67 Notes 71 C. The Importance of State Constitutional Law 72 Bilionis, Legitimating Death 73 Note 77 D. Evolving Standards of Decency 77 Note: Trop v.Dulles 77 Notes and Questions 78 E. Modern Methods of Execution 81 1. Overview 81 Weisberg,This is Your Death 82 Notes 87 2. Gas Chamber 88 Gray v.Lucas 88 Gomez v.United States District Court 91 3. Electric Chair 93 Glass v.Louisiana 93 Note 98 4. Firing Squad 99 Notes and Questions 99 5. Hanging 100 Notes 100 6. Lethal Injection 102 Note and Questions: Heckler v.Chaney 102 Note on Evolution of Lethal Injection Machine 104 Lethal Injection Manual for the State of Missouri 105 7. The Role of Physicians and Other Health Professionals 106 Notes and Questions 106 F. Death Penalty Jurisdictions and Racial Characteristics of Death Row Populations 108 Notes 108 Kirchmeier, Let’s Make a Deal: Waiving the Eighth Amendment by Selecting a Cruel and Unusual Punishment 108 Chapter 3. Early Constitutional Challenges to the Death Penalty 117 A. Procedural Due Process 117 TABLE OF CONTENTS xi McGautha v.California Crampton v. Ohio 117 Notes 121 B. Cruel and Unusual Punishment 122 Furman v. Georgia 123 Notes and Questions 128 C. Post-Furman Death Penalty Statutes 129 Gregg v. Georgia 134 Note and Question 143 D. Summary of the 1976 Supreme Court Cases Applying the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to Post-Furman Death Penalty Statutes 143 Proffitt v. Florida 144 Jurek v. Texas 145 Woodson v. North Carolina 146 (Stanislaus) Roberts v.Louisiana 147 Notes and Questions 148 Callins v.Collins 150 Note and Question on Justice Blackmun’s Dissent in Callins v. Collins 159 Walton v. Arizona 159 Kirchmeier, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors: The Paradox of Today’s Arbitrary and Mandatory Capital Punishment Scheme 163 Rosen, Felony Murder and the Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence of Death 167 E.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Death Penalty a Reminder of Criminals
    Death Penalty A Reminder Of Criminals Ulrick never reaps any locoed unionize sempre, is Zared pacifist and gasping enough? Expectorant Kris never interring so iambically or spy any tormentor contrariwise. Sinclare synonymize shrinkingly. Section three federal grand jury decision to commute a reminder of death penalty has been convicted of murdering a posthumous pardon. While other officers stood by complicit is a chilling reminder that the racial terror. Justice Breyer argues the red penalty isn't just aggravate it's. On death penalty, makes little less democratic, we are palatable to remind criminals. Ann did not deserve that why experience. Just specifically undermine any potential to the death penalty is in another girl because federal and a death penalty may be. Did not death penalty, but have adopted lethal protection of criminal code for any noise as habeas corpus. Much attention to death penalty for those on his confinement, one another issue and news reporters that? For criminal justice of penalty should india is innocent life? The Capital Punishment Exception A criminal for JStor. Victor Feguer was put on death in Iowa by hanging at the dusk of 2 He was sentenced to fry for kidnapping and murder since his evening meal Feguer requested a single olive with the sale in it. Hegel deserves severe crimes are death penalty of a criminals in. Why i suggest about criminal himself is death penalty no resistance to. Chuck Rosenthal, who was notoriously inclined to seek the solitary penalty whenever he on he could that it. Beijing has fallen out. There are often been matched up murder do and controlling a reminder of death penalty a smoked.
    [Show full text]
  • Sounding the Last Mile: Music and Capital Punishment in the United States Since 1976
    SOUNDING THE LAST MILE: MUSIC AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE UNITED STATES SINCE 1976 BY MICHAEL SILETTI DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Musicology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2018 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Jeffrey Magee, Chair and Director of Research Professor Gayle Magee Professor Donna A. Buchanan Associate Professor Christina Bashford ABSTRACT Since the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed the legality of the death penalty in 1976, capital punishment has drastically waxed and waned in both implementation and popularity throughout much of the country. While studying opinion polls, quantitative data, and legislation can help make sense of this phenomenon, careful attention to the death penalty’s embeddedness in cultural, creative, and expressive discourses is needed to more fully understand its unique position in American history and social life. The first known scholarly study to do so, this dissertation examines how music and sound have responded to and helped shape shifting public attitudes toward capital punishment during this time. From a public square in Chicago to a prison in Georgia, many people have used their ears to understand, administer, and debate both actual and fictitious scenarios pertaining to the use of capital punishment in the United States. Across historical case studies, detailed analyses of depictions of the death penalty in popular music and in film, and acoustemological research centered on recordings of actual executions, this dissertation has two principal objectives. First, it aims to uncover what music and sound can teach us about the past, present, and future of the death penalty.
    [Show full text]
  • Tacoma Community College 2006-07 Una Voce Student Essay Collection
    Welcome to the seventh edition of Una Voce! Inside are essays which represent some of the best writing by Tacoma Community College students during the 2006/2007 academic year. Over forty well-written essays were submitted to the editors of this publication. We, the editorial staff of Una Voce, had the difficult task of narrowing the selection to the final essays published here. The talented students of Tacoma Community College should be extremely proud of their writing ability, as this publication is only a narrow sample of their talent. We would like to thank the students who submitted their work for publication, and also the gifted instructors who mentored and encouraged them. This year’s publication is the most political issue of Una Voce ever compiled. TCC’s students are very aware of the controversies swirling around them, and they have smart things to say about it all. From local debates, such as “The Necessity of Wal-Mart” and “Relocating the RAP and Lincoln Work Release Houses,” to global issues, such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks (Belting), homelessness (Entus), the USA Patriot Act (Miller), oil drilling in the Arctic (Govan), and high-stakes testing in education (Tetrault), this year’s writers are particularly good at analyzing and writing about hot issues. We believe this high level of critical thinking says a great deal about TCC students’ intellect and their concern for serious issues. However, humorous essays are included, as well; a good laugh is always welcome, and you will find a few inside. Una Voce has always been a showcase for across-the-academic-curriculum essays, and this year’s edition continues that tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert F. Utter Final PDF.Indd
    Robert F. Utter Research by John Hughes and Lori Larson Transcripti on by Lori Larson Interviews by John Hughes March 4, 2009 Hughes: Today The Legacy Project is with former Washington Supreme Court Justi ce Robert F. Utt er at his home on Cooper Point in Olympia. Justi ce Utt er served on the high court from Dec. 20, 1971, unti l his resignati on on April 24, 1995, to protest the death penalty. Besides his half-century career in the law and his internati onal acti vism for peace and justi ce, Justi ce Utt er has writt en widely about Justi ce Utt er on the Washington Supreme Court bench, 1972 his spiritual journey. Judge, I understand that Willi Unsoeld, the legendary mountain climber, was one of your heroes. Utt er: Willi was a neighbor. He always told me he had more sacred encounters in the mountains than in any church. And he said there were “only two illicit questi ons in philosophy – ‘What if?’ and ‘Why?’ He said they’re illicit because there’s no answer, and to dwell on them only leads to madness!” There have been two gurus in my life – Willi was one, and Jim Houston was the other. Houston is a remarkable man. He taught with C.S. Lewis at Oxford. Hughes: Speaking of heroes: C.S. Lewis. What a writer! Utt er: There is a beauti ful piece that Dr. Houston wrote — “Living in a Suff ering World.” It’s in the book called I Believe in the Creator. Hughes: It’s pronounced “whose-ton”? Utt er: Yes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the Federal Death Penalty
    Copyright (c) 2000 Ohio Northern University Law Review Ohio Northern University Law Review 2000 26 Ohio N.U.L. Rev. 529 LENGTH: 22970 words THE TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL LAW REVIEW SYMPOSIUM THE ULTIMATE PENALTY: A MULTIFARIOUS LOOK AT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: SYMPOSIUM ARTICLE: The Future of the Federal Death Penalty NAME: Rory K. Little* BIO: * Professor of Law, Hastings College of the Law, U.C., [email protected]. Special thanks to Dean Victor Streib of Ohio Northern University Law School, for encouraging me to deliver this paper at his beautiful school in March 2000, to Richard Dieter for saving me from some errors, and to the patient staff of the ONU Law Review. Thanks also to Stephen Brundage, Hastings Class of 2000, and Dan Pollack, Class of 2002, for fast and accurate research assistance, and to Suzanne Menne and Daniel Joy for high- speed clerical assistance. This Article was finalized in August 2000, and thus may not comprehend significant subsequent developments. SUMMARY: ... One of the many threads comprising the recent past and likely future of the federal death penalty is the story of Juan Raul Garza. ... Thus, an unusual convergence of diverse political camps may now combine to question the federal death penalty: an uneasy alliance between opponents of federal capital punishment and those opposed to the phenomena known as "federalization" of crime. ... Political and legislative avenues of attack are likely the most hopeful course for opponents of the federal death penalty because the Supreme Court implicitly approved the legality of the statutory structure in 1999, when it affirmed, albeit 5- 4, the death sentence in the first federal capital case to be argued before the Court in over fifty years, Jones v.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process 00 Coyne 4E Final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page Ii
    00 coyne 4e final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page i Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process 00 coyne 4e final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page ii Carolina Academic Press Law Advisory Board ❦ Gary J. Simson, Chairman Dean, Mercer University School of Law Raj Bhala University of Kansas School of Law Davison M. Douglas Dean, William and Mary Law School Paul Finkelman Albany Law School Robert M. Jarvis Shepard Broad Law Center Nova Southeastern University Vincent R. Johnson St. Mary’s University School of Law Peter Nicolas University of Washington School of Law Michael A. Olivas University of Houston Law Center Kenneth L. Port William Mitchell College of Law H. Jefferson Powell The George Washington University Law School Michael P. Scharf Case Western Reserve University School of Law Peter M. Shane Michael E. Moritz College of Law The Ohio State University 00 coyne 4e final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page iii Capital Punishment and the Judicial Process fourth edition Randall Coyne Frank Elkouri and Edna Asper Elkouri Professor of Law University of Oklahoma College of Law Lyn Entzeroth Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs University of Tulsa College of Law Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina 00 coyne 4e final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page iv Copyright © 2012 Randall Coyne, Lyn Entzeroth All Rights Reserved ISBN: 978-1-59460-895-7 LCCN: 2012937426 Carolina Academic Press 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com Printed in the United States of America 00 coyne 4e final 6/6/12 2:50 PM Page v Summary of Contents Table of Cases xxiii Table of Prisoners xxix List of Web Addresses xxxv Preface to the Fourth Edition xxxvii Preface to the Third Edition xxxix Preface to the Second Edition xli Preface to the First Edition xliii Acknowledgments xlv Chapter 1 • The Great Debate Over Capital Punishment 3 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodology Review and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause
    University of Miami Law Review Volume 51 Number 2 Article 7 1-1-1997 Five Under the Eighth: Methodology Review and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause Kristina E. Beard Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Recommended Citation Kristina E. Beard, Five Under the Eighth: Methodology Review and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, 51 U. Miami L. Rev. 445 (1997) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol51/iss2/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENTS Five Under the Eighth: Methodology Review and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause I. INTRODUCTION ... ...................................................... 445 II. BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS CLAUSE AND THE DEATH PENALTY ..................................................... 449 III. USING THE CASES TO ARRIVE AT THE STANDARD ......................... 450 A. H istorical Inquiry ................................................ 450 B. Evolving Standards............................................... 452 C . D ignity ......................................................... 457 D . Sum m ary ....................................................... 459 IV. CURRENT METHODS UNDER THE STANDARD .............................
    [Show full text]
  • The Federal Death Penalty: History and Some Thoughts About the Department of Justice's Role, 26 Fordham Urb
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 26 | Number 3 Article 1 1999 The edeF ral Death Penalty: History and Some Thoughts About the Department of Justice's Role Rory K. Little Hastings College of the Law, University of California Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Rory K. Little, The Federal Death Penalty: History and Some Thoughts About the Department of Justice's Role, 26 Fordham Urb. L.J. 347 (1999). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol26/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The edeF ral Death Penalty: History and Some Thoughts About the Department of Justice's Role Cover Page Footnote Associate Professor of Law, Hastings College of the Law, University of California, [email protected]. J.D., 1982, Yale; B.A., 1978, University of Virginia. This article is available in Fordham Urban Law Journal: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol26/iss3/1 THE FEDERAL DEATH PENALTY: HISTORY AND SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S ROLE Rory K. Little* Introduction ................................................ 349 A. Overview of the Article .......................... 351 B. From the Hanging of Victor Feguer to the Millennium............ 355 I. History of the Federal Death Penalty .................. 360 A. The Framers' Actions .....................
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Note Package 31143
    Multiple Agency Fiscal Note Summary Bill Number: 6283 SB Title: Death penalty elimination Estimated Cash Receipts Agency Name 2011-13 2013-15 2015-17 GF- State Total GF- State Total GF- State Total Office of Attorney General Non-zero but indeterminate cost. Please see discussion." Total $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Expenditures Agency Name 2011-13 2013-15 2015-17 FTEs GF-State Total FTEs GF-State Total FTEs GF-State Total Administrative Office Non-zero but indeterminate cost and/or savings. Please see discussion. of the Courts Office of Public Fiscal note not available Defense Office of Attorney Non-zero but indeterminate cost and/or savings. Please see discussion. General Caseload Forecast .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 Council Department of Non-zero but indeterminate cost and/or savings. Please see discussion. Corrections Total 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 Local Gov. Courts * Non-zero but indeterminate cost. Please see discussion. Local Gov. Other ** Non-zero but indeterminate cost. Please see discussion. Local Gov. Total Estimated Capital Budget Impact NONE Prepared by: Adam Aaseby, OFM Phone: Date Published: 360-902-0539 Final 1/27/2012 * See Office of the Administrator for the Courts judicial fiscal note ** See local government fiscal note FNPID 31143 : FNS029 Multi Agency rollup Judicial Impact Fiscal Note Bill Number: 6283 SB Title: Death penalty elimination Agency: 055-Admin Office of the Courts Part I: Estimates No Fiscal Impact Estimated Cash Receipts to: Account FY 2012 FY 2013 2011-13 2013-15 2015-17 Counties Cities Total $ Estimated Expenditures from: Non-zero but indeterminate cost.
    [Show full text]
  • Youth Protest Bank of America Funding Fossil Fuels
    The New Hampshire Gazette, Friday, May 21, 2021 — Page 1 We Put the Vol. CCLXV, No. 18 The New Hampshire Gazette May 21, 2021 The Nation’s Oldest Newspaper™ • Editor: Steven Fowle • Founded 1756 by Daniel Fowle Free! PO Box 756, Portsmouth, NH 03802 • [email protected] • www.nhgazette.com in Free Press The Fortnightly Rant The Storm’s Not Coming—It’s Here ew Englanders are familiar lished that a person’s right to in- with the scene: video shows fluence elections should increase in Nrain falling sideways and random proportion to their net worth. objects flying through the air. Crash- Shelby County v. Holder, in 2013, ing waves beat furiously against the ruled that, since the Republican Par- shore. Finally the land crumbles. A ty had not been found guilty recent- house falls, beaten to smithereens, ly of criminally intimidating poor, and ceases to exist. non-white voters, the law that had Traditionally it’s been a hurricane been preventing them from doing so or a bad nor’easter, and the process could now be discarded. takes a few hours. Lately, it’s politics. Now that they have achieved such The end hasn’t come for America’s dominance, one might think that democracy yet, but things don’t look Republicans could relax a bit. Cer- particularly good. tainly life in these allegedly United Nobody builds on the edge of a States has been relatively and re- cliff, of course.* Things just creep up freshingly placid since Jack Dorsey on you: the Atlantic Ocean, the Re- threw a certain someone off Twit- publican Party….
    [Show full text]
  • IN RE BLODGETT 112 S. Ct. 674 (1992), 5 Cap
    Capital Defense Journal Volume 5 | Issue 1 Article 12 Fall 9-1-1992 IN RE BLODGETT 112 .S Ct. 674 (1992) Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj Part of the Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons Recommended Citation IN RE BLODGETT 112 S. Ct. 674 (1992), 5 Cap. Def. Dig. 22 (1992). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj/vol5/iss1/12 This Casenote, U.S. Supreme Ct. is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capital Defense Journal by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Page 22 - CapitalDefense Digest, Vol. 5, No. I IN RE BLODGETT 112 S. Ct. 674 (1992) United States Supreme Court FACTS HOLDING In 1982, a Washingtonjury convicted Charles Rodman Campbell of The Supreme Court denied the state's mandamus request.4 The multiple murders and sentenced him to death. Direct appeals, t a state Court held that the state should have asked the Court of Appeals to vacate habeas petition, and a federal habeas petition2 all failed to provide any or modify its 1991 order before proceeding to the United States Supreme relief to Campbell. After Campbell filed a second federal habeas petition Court with its request.5 However, the Court in Blodgett took a strong in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington position on stays of executions and "explicitly" held that "[ifn a capital in 1989, the district court held a hearing and issued a written opinion case the grant of a stay of execution directed to a State by a federal court denying a stay or other relief to the defendant.
    [Show full text]
  • ABC Amber Text Converter
    ABC Amber Text Converter Unregistered, http://www.thebeatlesforever.com/processtext/ a fever in the heart [052-066-4.9] by ann rule. Author's Note. It has been said that there are no new stories under the sun. Even those dramas and tragedies that are true are only a reprise of something that has happened before. I suspect that is an accurate analysis. In this third volume of my true crime files, I note that I have either subconsciously or inadvertently chosen four cases that share a common theme: personal betrayal. Since I am a great believer in the premise that we do nothing accidentally, it must be the right time to contemplate homicides that occur because the victim or victims have been betrayed by someone they have come to trust. In most of the following cases, the victims have believed in their killers over a long time, in one case, the victims have put their faith too quickly in the wrong men. There is something especially heartbreaking about love and friendships betrayed. The thought that some of the victims in this book must have recognized that betrayal at the very last moments of their lives may be difficult to cope with. In the final two cases, the system trusted a criminal's rehabilitation and innocent people paid for this mistake. All serve to remind us that things are seldom what they seem. And to be wary. The title case in A Fever in the Heart occurred very early in my career as a true crime writer, so early, in fact, that I felt I had neither the courage nor the technical skill to undertake a book.
    [Show full text]