DOCSLIB.ORG

Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE COUNTY OF STANLY SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 95 CRS 567 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) v. ) ) GUY TOBIAS LEGRANDE, Defendant. ) ........................................................... MOTION FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF PURSUANT TO THE RACIAL JUSTICE ACT ............................................................ Defendant, Guy Tobias LeGrande, through counsel, files this Motion for Appropriate Relief pursuant to the Racial Justice Act (HA), N.C. Gen. Stat. $$ 15A-2010 to 15A-2012, the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Art. I, $9 1, 19, 24, 26, and 27 of the North Carolina Constitution. Under the RJA and constitutional law, Defendant, who is currently under a sentence of death, is entitled to a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. INTRODUCTION 1. The evidence set out in this Motion establishes that race is a significant factor in North Carolina's system of capital punishment. The comprehensive, scientific study presented here demonstrates that race is a significant factor in capital proceedings. Prosecutors across the state strike eligible black and other racial minority venire members at double the rate they strike eligible white venire members and individuals who kill whites have significantly increased odds of receiving a death sentence than those who kill blacks or other racial minorities. 2. The evidence set out in this Motion also establishes that race is an extraordinarily significant factor in capital proceedings in the 20Ih ~rosecutorialDistrict. The disparity seen between the prosecutors' strikes of eligible black and other racial minority venire members compared to eligible white venire members is the highest of any district in North Carolina that has more than one person currently on death row. 3. Racial minority capital defendants prosecuted in Stanly County face an uphill battle - they are more likely to face a capital trial and more likely to receive a death sentence than similarly situated white defendants. Also, at the capital trial, the prosecutors have systematically excluded racial minority jurors to secure all-white juries for deciding the fate of these defendants. 4. In addition to the comprehensive, statistical study presented herein, this motion explores the dark history of racial tension and discrimination in the 20" District since this history is relevant to whether race was a significant factor in the charging and sentencing decisions at the time Mr. LeGrande was tried. 5. While the RJA does not require a showing of racial discrimination in a particular case, Mr. LeGrande can demonstrate that race discrimination infected his trial. Specifically, race was a significant factor in the prosecutors' decisions to (i) charge Mr. LeGrande with a capital offense; (ii) advance Mr. LeGrande's case to a capital trial; (iii) strike 100% of the black venire members; and (iv) repeatedly introduce race in the trial. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 6. On January 21, 1995, Guy LeGrande, a black male, was arrested and charged with the first degree murder of Ellen Munford, a white female. On March 13, 1995 superseding indictments were returned by the Stanly County Grand Jury for murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Howard Thomas (Tommy) Munford, the estranged husband of Ellen Munford and a white male, was also charged in her death with first degree murder. 7. Mr. LeGrande was initially represented by Walter Johnson and Ronald Barbee both of whom were retained by Mr. LeGrande's family members to represent him. Mr. LeGrande subsequently fired his retained counsel, rehsed the assistance of court-appointed counsel and was appointed two standby attorneys. Mr. LeGrande proceeded to trial pro se on April 15, 1996. At that trial an all-white jury found Mr. LeGrande guilty of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The jury found that Tommy Munford hired Mr. LeGrande to kill his estranged ex-wife, Ellen Munford. (Mr. Munford pled guilty to second degree murder, conspiracy to commit first degree murder and received a life sentence plus a consecutive twenty year sentence in exchange for his testimony against Mr. LeGrande.) Mr. LeGrande also represented himself at his sentencing hearing wherein the jury sentenced him to death on April 26, 1996. 8. The North Carolina Supreme Court affirmed Mr. LeGrande's conviction and sentence on July 24, 1997. State v. LeGrande, 346 N.C. 71 8, 487 S.E.2d 727 (1997). His execution was set for May 15, 1998. When it was clear that Mr. LeGrande would not personally take action to stay his execution, the Appellate Defender sought a stay in the North Carolina Supreme Court. The Court stayed the execution and remanded the matter to the Superior Court of Stanly County to give Mr. LeGrande an opportunity to pursue a motion for appropriate relief. State v. LeGrande, 348 N.C. 287,502 S.E.2d 849 (1998). 9. On September 8, 1998, Mr. LeGrande's sister and cousin sought to intervene as next friends to file a motion for appropriate relief on his behalf. The Superior Court of Stanly County dismissed the next friends motion for appropriate relief and subsequently dismissed apro se motion filed by Mr. LeGrande. Thomas v. State, 35 1 N.C. 1 15, 54 1 S.E.2d 470 (1 999); State v. LeGrande, 351 N.C. 115, 541 S.E.2d 465 (1999). The North Carolina Supreme Court declined to review the two orders. State v. LeGrande, 35 1 N.C. 189,541 S.E.2d 722 (1999). 10. Thereafter: Mr. LeGrande sought habeas review in Federal Court which was ultimately denied by the United States Supreme Court on October 2,2006. LeGrande v. Polk, 75 U.S.L.W. 3168 (2006). On October 16, 2006, the State of North Carolina set an execution date of December 1,2006. 11. On November 16, 2006, Mr. LeGrande, through counsel, filed a Motion to Stay Proceedings due to Mr. LeGrande's incapacity to proceed. The trial court entered an order temporarily staying Mr. LeGrande's execution to allow time for further psychiatric evaluation on November 27, 2006. After a subsequent evidentiary hearing, the Honorable W. Robert Bell found Mr. LeGrande incompetent to be executed in an order entered on June 27, 2008. Mr. LeGrande currently remains on death row and remains incompetent to proceed. While it is highly doubtful Mr. LeGrande will regain his capacity to proceed due to his severe mental illness, this motion is filed within the time allowed by law in order to preserve his claims under the RJA. THE RACIAL JUSTICE ACT 12. In enacting the Racial Justice Act (RJA), the North Carolina General Assembly made clear that the law of North Carolina rejects the influence of race discrimination in the administration of the death penalty. In so doing, the General Assembly accepted the challenge issued by the United States Supreme Court in McCleskey v. Kemp. Addressing the state legislatures, the McCleskey Court ruled that it was the duty of the states "to respond to the will and consequently the moral values of the people" when addressing the difficult and complex issue of racial prejudice in the administration of capital punishment. 48 1 U.S. 279,3 19 (1 987). 13. Under the RJA, a capital defendant shall prevail if there is evidence proving that "race was a significant factor in decisions to seek or impose the sentence of death in the county, the prosecutorial district, the judicial division, or the State at the time the death sentence was sought or imposed." N.C. Gen. Stat. 8 15A-2012(a)(3) (emphasis added). 14. The RJA identifies three different categories of racial disparities a defendant may present in order to meet the "significant factor" standard. Evidence establishing any one of these categories is sufficient to establish an RJA violation: (a) Death sentences were sought or imposed significantly more frequently upon persons of one race than upon persons of another race. (b) Death sentences were sought or imposed significantly more frequently as punishment for capital offenses against persons of one race than as punishment of capital offenses against persons of another race. (c) Race was a significant factor in decisions to exercise peremptory challenges during jury selection. N.C. Gen. Stat. 8 15A-20 1 1(b)(l )-(3). 15. If a defendant is able to "state with particularity how the evidence supports a claim that race was a significant factor" in any of these three categories, the RJA provides that "[tlhe court shall schedule a hearing on the claim and shall prescribe a time for the submission of evidence by both parties." N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-20 12(a) and (a)(2) (emphasis added). 16. Once the defendant has established a prima facie case of significant racial disparities, the State has the opportunity to respond with its own statistical evidence. Because the RJA mandates relief upon a showing of racial disparities in the judicial division or the state, see N.C. Gen. Stat. $ 15A-2012(a)(3), if the defendant's case is based on a showing of statewide or division-wide discrimination, the State's rebuttal cannot be based simply upon a showing that no disparities occurred in the county or prosecutorial district. 17. If the defendant ultimately proves an RJA violation, the remedy is the imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. N.C. Gen. Stat. $ 15A- 2012(a)(3); compare Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 100 (1 986) (holding that a defendant's conviction will be reversed under the Equal Protection Clause if there is evidence that the State exercised peremptory strikes based on race). Proof of an RJA violation does not entitle the defendant to a new trial or a new sentencing hearing. 18. For the reasons stated below, Defendant is entitled to relief under the RJA, N.C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Struggle to Redevelop a Jim Crow State, 1960–2000
    Educating for a New Economy: The Struggle to Redevelop a Jim Crow State, 1960–2000 by William D. Goldsmith Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Nancy MacLean, Supervisor ___________________________ Edward J. Balleisen ___________________________ Adriane Lentz-Smith ___________________________ Gary Gereffi ___________________________ Helen Ladd Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in The Graduate School of Duke University 2018 ABSTRACT Educating for a New Economy: The Struggle to Redevelop a Jim Crow State, 1960–2000 by William D. Goldsmith Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Nancy MacLean, Supervisor ___________________________ Edward J. Balleisen ___________________________ Adriane Lentz-Smith ___________________________ Gary Gereffi ___________________________ Helen Ladd An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2018 Copyright by William D. Goldsmith 2018 Abstract This dissertation shows how an array of policymakers, invested in uprooting an unequal political economy descended from the plantation system and Jim Crow, gravitated to education as a centerpiece of development strategy, and why so many are still disappointed in its outcomes. By looking at state-wide policymaking in North Carolina and policy effects in the state’s black belt counties, this study shows why the civil rights movement was vital for shifting state policy in former Jim Crow states towards greater investment in human resources. By breaking down employment barriers to African Americans and opening up the South to new people and ideas, the civil rights movement fostered a new climate for economic policymaking, and a new ecosystem of organizations flourished to promote equitable growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Winter 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. Winter 2018 (As of January 1, 2018) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,768 Race of Defendant: White 1,170 (42.27%) Black 1,152 (41.62%) Latino/Latina 365 (13.19%) Native American 27 (0.98%) Asian 53 (1.91%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,713 (98.01%) Female 55 (1.99%) 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 Fall 2017 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.
    [Show full text]
  • House/Senate District Number Name House 10 John Bell House 17 Frank Iler House 18 Deb Butler House 19 Ted Davis, Jr
    House/Senate District Number Name House 10 John Bell House 17 Frank Iler House 18 Deb Butler House 19 Ted Davis, Jr. House 20 Holly Grange House 23 Shelly Willingham House 24 Jean Farmer Butterfield House 26 Donna McDowell White House 27 Michael H. Wray House 28 Larry C. Strickland House 31 Zack Hawkins House 32 Terry Garrison House 33 Rosa U. Gill House 34 Grier Martin House 35 Chris Malone House 36 Nelson Dollar House 37 John B. Adcock House 38 Yvonne Lewis Holley House 39 Darren Jackson House 41 Gale Adcock House 42 Marvin W. Lucas House 43 Elmer Floyd House 44 Billy Richardson House 45 John Szoka House 49 Cynthia Ball House 50 Graig R. Meyer House 51 John Sauls House 52 Jamie Boles House 53 David Lewis House 54 Robert T. Reives, II House 55 Mark Brody House 57 Ashton Clemmons House 58 Amos Quick House 59 Jon Hardister House 60 Cecil Brockman House 62 John Faircloth House 66 Ken Goodman House 68 Craig Horn House 69 Dean Arp House 70 Pat B. Hurley House 72 Derwin Montgomery House 74 Debra Conrad House 75 Donny C. Lambeth House 77 Julia Craven Howard House 82 Linda P. Johnson House 85 Josh Dobson House 86 Hugh Blackwell House 87 Destin Hall House 89 Mitchell Smith Setzer House 90 Sarah Stevens House 91 Kyle Hall House 92 Chaz Beasley House 95 John A. Fraley House 96 Jay Adams House 97 Jason R. Saine House 98 John R. Bradford III House 102 Becky Carney House 103 Bill Brawley House 104 Andy Dulin House 105 Scott Stone House 106 Carla Cunningham House 107 Kelly Alexander House 108 John A.
    [Show full text]
  • How a Confluence of Social Movements Convinced North Carolina to Go Where the Mccleskey Court Wouldnâ•Žt
    Michigan State University College of Law Digital Commons at Michigan State University College of Law Faculty Publications 1-1-2011 Confronting Race: How a Confluence of Social Movements Convinced North Carolina to Go where the McCleskey Court Wouldn’t Barbara O'Brien Michigan State University College of Law, [email protected] Catherine M. Grosso Michigan State University College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.msu.edu/facpubs Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, and the Other Law Commons Recommended Citation Barbara O'Brien & Catherine M. Grosso, Confronting Race: How a Confluence of Social Movements Convinced North Carolina to Go where the McCleskey Court Wouldn’t, 2011 Mich. St. L. Rev. 463 (2011). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons at Michigan State University College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons at Michigan State University College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONFRONTING RACE: HOW A CONFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS CONVINCED NORTH CAROLINA TO GO WHERE THE MCCLESKEY COURT WOULDN’T Barbara O’Brien & Catherine M. Grosso∗ 2011 MICH. ST. L. REV. 463 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 463 I. THE LONG STRUGGLE TO CONFRONT RACE IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ........................................................................................... 467 A. The Constitutional Litigation Strategy Disappoints When the Court Won’t Bite .................................................................... 467 B. Back to Basics: A More Incremental Approach to Reform ......... 472 II. A CONFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cassociation^ of Southern Women for the "Prevention of Cynching ******
    cAssociation^ of Southern Women for the "Prevention of Cynching JESSIE DANIEL AMES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MRS. ATTWOOD MARTIN MRS. W. A. NEWELL CHAIRMAN 703 STANDARD BUILDING SECRETARY-TREASURER Louisville, Ky. Greensboro, n. c. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE cAtlanta, Qa MRS. J. R. CAIN, COLUMBIA, S. C. MRS. GEORGE DAVIS, ORANGEBURG, S. C. MRS. M. E. TILLY, ATLANTA, GA. MRS. W. A. TURNER, ATLANTA, GA. MRS. E. MARVIN UNDERWOOD, ATLANTA, GA. January 7, 1932 Composite Picture of Lynching and Lynchers "Vuithout exception, every lynching is an exhibition of cowardice and cruelty. 11 Atlanta Constitution, January 16, 1931. "The falsity of the lynchers' pretense that he is the guardian of chastity." Macon News, November 14, 1930. "The lyncher is in very truth the most vicious debaucher of spirit­ ual values." Birmingham Age Herald, November 14, 1930. "Certainly th: atrocious barbarities of the mob do not enhance the security of women." Charleston, S. C. Evening lost. "Hunt down a member of a lynching mob and he will usually be found hiding behind a woman's skirt." Christian Century, January 8, 1931. ****** In the year 1930, Texas and Georgia, were black spots on the map. This year, 1931, those two states cleaned up and came thro with "no lynchings." But honors arc even. Two states, Louisiana and Tennessee, with "no lynchings" in 1930, add one each in 1931. Florida and Mississippi were the only two states having lynchings in both years. Five of the eight in the South were in these two States alone. Jessie Daniel limes Executive Director Association of Southern Women for the Prevention of Lynching CENTRAL COUNCIL Representatives at Large Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Lethal Injection, Or Choice of Gas Chamber for Those Sentenced Before November 1992) Total = 121 B = 13 W = 85 L = 18 N = 5 A= 0 U = 0
    NotiottolCJJJb Suite 1600 NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE 99 Hudson Street AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. New York, N.Y. 10013-2897 (212) 219-1900 Fax: (212) 226-759 Fall 1998 ) DEATH R0\1/, V.SA TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWNTO LOP: 3,517 (As of October 1, 1998) · Race of Defendant: White 1,649 (46.89%) Black 1,495 (42.51%) Latino/Latina 282 ( 8.02%) Native American 50 ( 1.42%) Asian 27 ( .77%) Unknown at this issue 14 ( • 4 0%) Gender: Male 3,469 (98.64 %) Female 48 ( 1. 36 %) Juveniles: Male 73 ( 2.08%) DISPOSITIONS SINCE JANUARY 1, 1973: Executions: 481 Suicides: 51 Commutations: 76 (including those by the Governor of Texas resulting from favorable court decisions) Died of natural causes or killed while under death sentence: 112 Convictions/Sentences reversed: 1642 JURISDICTIONS WITH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTES: 40 (Underlined jurisdictions have statutes but no sentences imposed) 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: 1 3 Alaska, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wiscons i n. Relf"""'/Off"" COfttri6..uo,u M t The NAACP Leg. I Oeferuc at Educau onal Fund. Inc. (LOF) 11 not pan Suite JOI Jtd.., 1,hl,for U.S. Swue21ll of the National Assoc1at1on for the Advancement of Colored People 127SK Street, NW 31SWm Ninth Strcct t4X pvrposes (NAACP) ah.hough LOF wu founded by the NAACP and 1u '"'°"" wm Wu hington.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 2 ARGUMENT .............................................................................................................................. 5 I. Legislative Defendants Must Provide the Information Requested in the Second Set of Interrogatories ............................................................................................................. 5 II. In the Alternative, or if Legislative Defendants Do Not Provide The Home Addresses By March 1, the Court Should Bar Legislative Defendants From Defending the 2017 Plans on the Basis of Any Incumbency Theory................................. 7 III. The Court Should Award Fees and Expenses and Other Appropriate Relief ..................... 8 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .................................................................................................. 11 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Cloer v. Smith , 132 N.C. App. 569, 512 S.E.2d 779 (1999)............................................................................ 7 F. E. Davis
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT “The Good Angel of Practical Fraternity:” the Ku Klux Klan in Mclennan County, 1915-1924. Richard H. Fair, M.A. Me
    ABSTRACT “The Good Angel of Practical Fraternity:” The Ku Klux Klan in McLennan County, 1915-1924. Richard H. Fair, M.A. Mentor: T. Michael Parrish, Ph.D. This thesis examines the culture of McLennan County surrounding the rise of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s and its influence in central Texas. The pervasive violent nature of the area, specifically cases of lynching, allowed the Klan to return. Championing the ideals of the Reconstruction era Klan and the “Lost Cause” mentality of the Confederacy, the 1920s Klan incorporated a Protestant religious fundamentalism into their principles, along with nationalism and white supremacy. After gaining influence in McLennan County, Klansmen began participating in politics to further advance their interests. The disastrous 1922 Waco Agreement, concerning the election of a Texas Senator, and Felix D. Robertson’s gubernatorial campaign in 1924 represent the Klan’s first and last attempts to manipulate politics. These failed endeavors marked the Klan’s decline in McLennan County and Texas at large. “The Good Angel of Practical Fraternity:” The Ku Klux Klan in McLennan County, 1915-1924 by Richard H. Fair, B.A. A Thesis Approved by the Department of History ___________________________________ Jeffrey S. Hamilton, Ph.D., Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee ___________________________________ T. Michael Parrish, Ph.D., Chairperson ___________________________________ Thomas L. Charlton, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Stephen M. Sloan, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Jerold L. Waltman, Ph.D. Accepted by the Graduate School August 2009 ___________________________________ J.
    [Show full text]
  • INFORMATION to USERS This Manuscript Has Been Reproduced
    INFO RM A TIO N TO U SER S This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI film s the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be fromany type of con^uter printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependentquality upon o fthe the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and inqjroper alignment can adverse^ afreet reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note wiD indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one e3q)osure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photogr^hs included inoriginal the manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for aiy photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI direct^ to order. UMJ A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313.'761-4700 800/521-0600 LAWLESSNESS AND THE NEW DEAL; CONGRESS AND ANTILYNCHING LEGISLATION, 1934-1938 DISSERTATION presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Robin Bernice Balthrope, A.B., J.D., M.A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Racial Justice Act and the Long Struggle with Race and the Death Penalty in North Carolina*
    MOSTELLER&KOTCH.PTD2 9/18/10 12:07 PM THE RACIAL JUSTICE ACT AND THE LONG STRUGGLE WITH RACE AND THE DEATH PENALTY IN NORTH CAROLINA* SETH KOTCH & ROBERT P. MOSTELLER** In August 2009, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the Racial Justice Act (“RJA”), which commands that no person shall be executed “pursuant to any judgment that was sought or obtained on the basis of race.” One of the most significant features of the RJA is its use of statistical evidence to determine whether the race of defendants or victims played a significant role in death penalty decisions by prosecutors and jurors and in the prosecutor’s exercise of peremptory challenges. The RJA commits North Carolina courts to ensuring that race does not significantly affect death sentences. This Article examines the RJA and North Carolina’s long struggle with race and the death penalty. The first part traces the history of race and the death penalty in the state, showing that racial prejudice exerted a consistent, strong, and pernicious influence on the imposition and disposition of death sentences. From colonial times into the 1960s, the overwhelming majority of those executed were African American, and although most victims and perpetrators of crime are of the same race, the overwhelming majority of victims in cases where executions took place were white. Hundreds of African Americans have been executed for a variety of crimes against white victims, including scores of African American men executed for rape. However, just four whites have been executed for crimes against African American victims, all murders. * © 2010 Seth Kotch & Robert P.
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri State Archives Finding Aid 5.20
    Missouri State Archives Finding Aid 5.20 OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE COMMISSIONS PARDONS, 1836- Abstract: Pardons (1836-2018), restorations of citizenship, and commutations for Missouri convicts. Extent: 66 cubic ft. (165 legal-size Hollinger boxes) Physical Description: Paper Location: MSA Stacks ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION Alternative Formats: Microfilm (S95-S123) of the Pardon Papers, 1837-1909, was made before additions, interfiles, and merging of the series. Most of the unmicrofilmed material will be found from 1854-1876 (pardon certificates and presidential pardons from an unprocessed box) and 1892-1909 (formerly restorations of citizenship). Also, stray records found in the Senior Reference Archivist’s office from 1836-1920 in Box 164 and interfiles (bulk 1860) from 2 Hollinger boxes found in the stacks, a portion of which are in Box 164. Access Restrictions: Applications or petitions listing the social security numbers of living people are confidential and must be provided to patrons in an alternative format. At the discretion of the Senior Reference Archivist, some records from the Board of Probation and Parole may be restricted per RSMo 549.500. Publication Restrictions: Copyright is in the public domain. Preferred Citation: [Name], [Date]; Pardons, 1836- ; Commissions; Office of Secretary of State, Record Group 5; Missouri State Archives, Jefferson City. Acquisition Information: Agency transfer. PARDONS Processing Information: Processing done by various staff members and completed by Mary Kay Coker on October 30, 2007. Combined the series Pardon Papers and Restorations of Citizenship because the latter, especially in later years, contained a large proportion of pardons. The two series were split at 1910 but a later addition overlapped from 1892 to 1909 and these records were left in their respective boxes but listed chronologically in the finding aid.
    [Show full text]
  • Absent Accountability: How Prosecutorial Impunity Hinders the Fair Administration of Justice in America Scott .J Krischke
    Journal of Law and Policy Volume 19 | Issue 1 Article 14 2010 Absent Accountability: How Prosecutorial Impunity Hinders the Fair Administration of Justice in America Scott .J Krischke Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Scott .J Krischke, Absent Accountability: How Prosecutorial Impunity Hinders the Fair Administration of Justice in America, 19 J. L. & Pol'y (2010). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol19/iss1/14 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. ABSENT ACCOUNTABILITY: HOW PROSECUTORIAL IMPUNITY HINDERS THE FAIR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN AMERICA Scott J. Krischke* “The primary responsibility of prosecution is to see that justice is accomplished.” – National District Attorney’s Association1 INTRODUCTION In the late afternoon of January 13, 2009, eighteen-year-old Rondell Rogers was marched from his jail cell at Orleans Parish Prison to Magistrate Court in New Orleans Criminal District Court.2 Wearing an orange jumpsuit and the chains required of the inmates of Orleans Parish Prison, Rogers took hobbled, jangling steps over to the defense table to begin a probable cause hearing. Rogers, a local kid from the tough Mid-City neighborhood of New * Scott J. Krischke, BA DePaul University, JD Candidate Brooklyn Law School (expected 2011); Law Clerk for Orleans Public Defenders (2009), Cook County Public Defender’s Office (2010), and Legal Aid Society, Brooklyn (2010– 2011); Defense Investigator, Dinolt Becnel & Wells Investigative Group, Washington, DC (2007–2011).
    [Show full text]