200Th Execution Organizing Packet
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
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. -
Death Row U.S.A
DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2013 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 2013 (As of July 1, 2013) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 3,095 Race of Defendant: White 1,334 (43.10%) Black 1,291 (41.71%) Latino/Latina 391 (12.63%) Native American 33 (1.07%) Asian 45 (1.42%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.03%) Gender: Male 3,034 (98.03%) Female 61 (1.97%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 35 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, 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: 18 Alaska, Connecticut [see note below], District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: Connecticut 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 Spring 2013 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2012 and October Term 2013 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Article I § 10 Ex Post Facto Clause Peugh v. -
Seeking Justice in TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY
Seeking Justice IN TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY WORKING TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY IN TEXAS/FALL 2005 The Journey of Hope is Coming to Texas by Bill Pelke Murder victims family Beginning in Houston, and Coalition to Abolish the Inside this issue: members who oppose the reaching out to communities in Death Penalty. On Saturday death penalty will address Beaumont, Corpus Christi, the 29th a march to the State News from Nancy 2, 3 the statement often used by Victoria and Huntsville, the Capitol for a rally will be pro death penalty forces: Journey speakers will present held. The march and rally “You would support the their testimonies in high will combine the forces of the Shout out Show 3 death penalty if someone in schools, colleges, churches and Journey, the NCADP, your family were killed.” other various venues for five TCADP, Campaign to End TCADP Chapter News 4, 5 Family members of murder days before moving on to the the Death Penalty and the victims will be coming to Dallas/Fort Worth area doing Moratorium Network. Activ- Legislative Update 6, 7 the Texas Journey of Hope similar events for the next four ists are greatly encouraged to Frances Newton 7 from around the country. days. join the Journey tour, the For 17 days they will be NCADP conference and the Death Penalty Articles 8,9 sharing their stories of their "I am a Christian, Capital march. The Journey own journey ‘from violence and Jesus said, couldn't happen without activ- New Staff 10 to healing’. Speakers will ist support across the state of be talking about how the ‘Whosoever has no Texas. -
White V. Johnson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Melvin Wayne White, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. } ) Gary Johnson, ) Executive Director, ) Texas Department of Criminal Justice, ) ) Doug Dretke ) No. _____ Director, Correctional Institutions Division ) (death-penalty case) Texas Department of Criminal Justice, ) ) Charles O'Reilly, ) Senior Warden, Huntsville Unit ) Huntsville, Texas, ) ) and, ) ) Unknown Executioners; ) ) Defendants. ) PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT I. Nature of Action 01. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U .S.C. § 1983 for violations and threatened violations of the right of plaintiff to be free from cruel and usual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiff seeks equitable relief. H. Plaintiff 02. Melvin White is a United States citizen and a resident ofthe State of Texas. He is currently a death-sentenced inmate under the supervision of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, TDCJ # 999317. He is held in the Polunsky Unit at 3872 F.M. South 350, Livingston, TX 77351. HI. Defendants 03. Defendant Gary Johnson is the Executive Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Doug Dretke is the Director of the Correctional Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Charles O'Reilly is the Senior Warden of the Huntsville Unit where the execution will occur. Defendants Unknown Executioners are employed by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and will carry out the scheduled execution of Plaintiff. Plaintiff does not yet know their identities. IV. Jurisdiction and Venue 04. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question), 1343 (civil rights violations), 220 1 (declaratory relief), and 2202 (further relief). -
Docket No. ___In the Supreme Court of The
DOCKET NO. _______ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2020 --------------------------------- ANTHONY JOHN PONTICELLI, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT --------------------------- MARTIN J. McCLAIN Florida Bar No. 0754773 Law Office of Martin J. McClain 141 N.E. 30th Street Wilton Manors, FL 33334 Telephone: (305) 984-8344 FAX: (954) 564-5412 [email protected] COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER QUESTIONS PRESENTED--CAPITAL CASE 1. Whether the Florida Supreme Court’s statutory construction in Hurst v. State constitutes substantive law, and if so, whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that this substantive law govern the law in existence at the time of Mr. Ponticelli’s alleged offense? 2. Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits State v. Poole to retroactively change Florida’s substantive law to Mr. Ponticelli’s detriment? 3. Whether McKinney v. Arizona governs the retroactivity of Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State as to Florida’s capital sentencing statute which is markedly different than Arizona’s statute? 4. Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict on the elements required for a capital defendant to be sentenced to death? i NOTICE OF RELATED CASES Per Supreme Court Rule 14.1(b)(iii), the following cases relate to this petition: Underlying Trial: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered August 12, 1988 Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. 60-73,064) Ponticelli v. State, 593 So.