DOCSLIB.ORG

Programme Cover

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Programme Cover This Court charges the United States death penalty with z perverting THE COURSE OF JUSTICE JURY BUNDLE 2nd March 2010 TABLE of contents 01. indictment a message from the Amicus 02. trustees 03. a message from the UN judges : 04. the rt hon. lord woolf of barnes sir louis blom-cooper QC, geoffrey robertson QC 06. court clerk : alistair carmichael MP prosecution : roy amlot QC and 07. junior counsel rev. cathy harrington 08. a mother’s story julian killingley 12. lethal indifference : an executive summary 19. nicholas trenticosta facts about the death penalty 24. defence : dorian lovell-pank QC and junior counsel robert blecker 25. words of adam smith and sir programme james fitzjames stephen paul cassell 6.30 court sits : trial commences 34. colleen reed opening speeches prosecution case kent scheidegger 36. smoke and mirrors on race and 7.50 reception the death penalty 8.30 defence case 42. amicus summing up the verdict 44. andrew lee jones 45. supporters INDICTMENT IN THE CROWN COURT SITTING AT EMMANUEL CENTRE THE QUEEN v. THE UNITED STATES DEATH PENALTY THE UNITED STATES DEATH PENALTY is charged as follows: STATEMENT OF OFFENCE DOING ACTS TENDING AND INTENDED TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE THE UNITED STATES DEATH PENALTY between 4th July 1776 and 2nd March 2010 did a series of acts tending to pervert the course of justice, namely. (i) meted out punishment in a discriminatory way resulting in a disproportionate number of black and ethnic minority defendants being put to death (ii) meted out punishment in a discriminatory way resulting in a disproportionate number of poor people being put to death (iii) used threats to force defendants to plead to non-capital homicide to escape the penalty of death (iv) asserted that it was a just and proportionate punishment for murderers (v) claimed falsely that it was of benefit to society in acting as a deterrent intending that the course of justice should thereby be perverted. OFFICER OF THE COURT 01 a message from the Amicus trustees Welcome, and thank you for coming. By hosting this trial, Amicus is seeking to offer participants and attendees the opportunity to be part of a thorough debate on the issues surrounding the US death penalty. We have been fortunate to receive financial support from many sources, in particular Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Baker & McKenzie, for which we are extremely grateful. Clearly, as many of you know, Amicus’ objectives are to assist those awaiting capital trial and punishment in the US, or any other country, and to raise awareness of potential abuses of defendants’ rights. We believe that our duty to raise awareness will be well-served by this evening’s proceedings. Normally, events focusing on the death penalty are hosted by one or other ‘side’ of the argument, which often results in an in-built bias (even if this is not the intention). Our intention tonight is that the US death penalty will be subject to a rigorous examination, with forceful opinions being aired by all the witnesses. We are honoured that Lord Woolf of Barnes agreed to preside over the trial, and that he is to be assisted by Sir Louis Blom-Cooper QC and Geoffrey Robertson QC. And, we are grateful to our patron, Alistair Carmichael MP, for his continued support and for his agreement to be this court’s Court Clerk. Quite simply, tonight’s proceedings would not be taking place without the support, hard work and commitment from the team at 6 King’s Bench Walk. It was essential that two leading silks led the prosecution and defence teams, and we thank Roy Amlot QC and Dorian Lovell-Pank QC for agreeing to fill these roles. And, although too numerous to list here, we also thank all the junior counsel who have worked on the case. But, without the witnesses, we would not be here. We are grateful to them for agreeing to participate, in the full knowledge that their evidence will be subject to exacting cross- examination. Rev. Cathy Harrington, Prof. Julian Killingley and Nick Trenticosta will, we believe, provide powerful and astute testimony espousing their reasons for being against the death penalty. Prof. Robert Blecker, Prof. Paul Cassell and Kent Scheidegger will, we are sure, provide strong and insightful justification for why they are pro capital punishment. We hope that, in addition to deliberating on the evidence given in person, you will find the submissions by each of the witnesses to the Jury Bundle of assistance in reaching your verdict. Lastly, we should like to thank our staff and the many Amicus volunteers, especially Shefali Lamba, who have worked so hard to ensure the success of this evening. Margot Ravenscroft and Marian Cleghorn’s dedication to Amicus is critical to our work, but – even with their dedication to their roles – the charity relies heavily on its volunteers to achieve its objectives. We are most grateful for their contribution. joanne cross claire jenkins tope adeyemi bill chipperfield mark george QC erica pomeroy a message from the UN manfred nowak UN Special Rapporteur on torture In my experience, the lack of training and capacity as well as endemic corruption of the law enforcement system often lead to arbitrary arrest and detention, which, in the absence of adequate safeguards, leaves the “accused without the possibility to defend fully his or her rights. Without functioning safeguards and effective judicial control, accused persons are rendered completely powerless and left to the mercy of the investigating agency/police, which is often under considerable pressure to “deliver results”. Undoubtedly, criminal justice is a complicated system of needs and norms. A carefully calibrated balance of mechanisms allowing for complaints, controls, monitoring, etc is needed to protect the rights of the accused and ensure the fair and speedy delivery of justice. A large number of actors have stakes in maintaining that balance, including the law-enforcement bodies themselves through regular inspections, prosecutors, judges, medical personnel, penitentiary staff, lawyers, etc. International law provides detailed minimum standards when it comes to fair trial, the presumption of innocence, the prohibition of arbitrary detention, remedies for alleged victims, etc. These guidelines should be taken into account throughout the entire criminal justice process. ” 03 judges the rt hon. lord woolf of barnes Lord Woolf was Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales from 2000 – 2005. Since then he has been primarily involved in developing Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) and Mediation. His report Access to Justice, 1996 (‘The Woolf Report’) is generally acknowledged to have been the catalyst for interest in ADR in England. Lord Woolf is a chartered arbitrator and serves on many bodies in this role. biography In 2005, Lord Woolf conducted a review of the working methods of the European Court of Human Rights, and was a member of the ‘Group of Wise Persons’ which developed the strategy to secure the long-term effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights. He was called to the Bar in 1955, and from 1973 held a variety of counsel posts until he was appointed a judge in 1979 and then a Lord Justice of Appeal in 1986. In 2000, he was appointed Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, a position from which he retired in 2005. Lord Woolf was appointed a non- permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong in 2003 and continues in this role, and is president of the Civil and Commercial Court for Qatar. Lord Woolf regularly contributes to legal journals, lectures and has compiled 04 various reports at the UK government and other bodies’ requests. sir louis blom-cooper QC mim trenticosta Sir Louis (associate tenant, Doughty Street Chambers) has been at the forefront of administrative law throughout its modern development. He is a highly-regarded academic, and he has been a judge in England, and Jersey and Guernsey. Sir Louis is much in demand as a member (often as the chair/leader) of independent commissions and official enquiries. Most biographies recently, he was appointed as the first Independent Commissioner for the Holding Centres in Northern Ireland. Previous roles include chair of the Mental Health Commission from 1987 – 1994 and chair of the enquiry into the case of Jasmine Beckford. His experience in the field of public enquiries resulted in him giving evidence on this topic in a case at the High Court. geoffrey robertson QC Mr Robertson (joint head, Doughty Street Chambers) has been involved in many of Britain’s most celebrated trials. He is a recorder and a prolific author, and he works extensively on the international scene, appearing in various high- level courts across the world. Mr Robertson has conducted a number of missions on behalf of Amnesty International to South Africa and Vietnam, and on behalf of the Bar Council/Law Society Human Rights Mission to Malawi. As a UN Appeal Judge he has delivered important decisions on the illegality of conscripting child soldiers and the invalidity of amnesties for war crimes. Mr Robertson co-founded Doughty Street Chambers in 1990. 05 court clerk alistair carmichael MP biography Mr Carmichael was first elected the Member of Parliament for Orkney and Shetland in 2001 and is the Liberal Democrat Party’s spokesman on Northern Ireland and Scotland. He chairs the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Abolition of the Death Penalty which attracts cross-party support in the Palace of Westminster with almost 100 members. Mr Carmichael is an Amicus patron. After he left school, Mr Carmichael worked in the hotel industry for five years before starting his further education. He gained a law degree from the University of Aberdeen in 1992 and then worked as a solicitor in Scotland.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • SHELBY COUNTY MAYOR A. C. Wharton
    SHELBY COUNTY MAYOR A. C. Wharton SHELBY COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS David Lillard, Chairman Joe S. Ford Deidre Malone Henri E. Brooks Mike Carpenter George S. Flinn, Jr. Sidney Chism J.W. Gibson, II Joyce Avery James M. Harvey Wyatt Bunker Mike Ritz Steve Mulroy ANNUAL REPORT CRIMINAL COURT OF MEMPHIS AND SHELBY COUNTY 201 Poplar – Suite 401 Memphis, Tennessee 38103 2007 William R. Key, Criminal Court Clerk Thirtieth Judicial District At Memphis CRIMINAL COURT JUDGES Paula Skahan Division I W. Otis Higgs, Jr. Division II John P. Colton, Jr. Division III Carolyn Wade Blackett Division IV James M. Lammey, Jr. Division V W. Fred Axley Division VI Lee V. Coffee Division VII Chris Craft Division VIII W. Mark Ward Division IX James C. Beasley, Jr. Division X 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Clerk’s Profile 4 Clerk’s Photo 5 Appointed Officials 6 Organizational Chart 8 Tennessee Court Structure 9 State Trial Courts 11 Operations Division Supervisory Staff 14 Operations Statistical Information 17 Administrative Services Division Supervisory Staff 55 Administrative Services Division Statistical Information 57 Finance Division Supervisory Staff 64 Finance Division Statistical Information 67 Miscellaneous Data 74 Glossary 76 3 WILLIAM R. KEY Criminal Court Clerk Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis William R. Key was re-elected to the position of the Criminal Court Clerk and assumed the office for a fourth term on September 1, 2006. Keeper of the records for Criminal Court of Shelby County Former coach and teacher at Hillcrest High School where he taught Economics, American History, and Psychology and also coached interscholastic sports Former Administrative Assistant to Juvenile Court Judge Kenneth A.
    [Show full text]
  • Mccleskey's Omission: the Racial Geography of Retribution
    McCleskey's Omission: The Racial Geography of Retribution G. Ben Cohen* I. Introduction ....................................... 65 II. McCleskey v. Kemp: Tolerating Statistical Evidence Establishing the Influence of Race ................................... 71 III. The Continued Role of Race in the Operation of the Death Penalty ............ 72 A. State Level Discrepancies Focus on Race of the Victim .. .......... 73 B. Federal Death Penalty ............................. ..... 755 IV.The Local Level of Retribution, Race, and Arbitrariness ......... ........ 788 A. The Connection Between Community and the Racial Geography of Retribution ............................... ......... 86 B. The Local Geographic Circumstances of Race and Retribution in the Death Penalty ................................ ..... 90 V. The Legal Landscape of Retribution 90 A. Kennedy v. Louisiana: Retribution Contradicts the Law's Own Ends .... 91 B. Original Sins: The Eighth Amendment Accommodation of the Angry Mob............................................... 92 VI. The Constitutional Significance of the Racial Origins of Retribution ... 93 VII. Conclusion ............................................ 98 I. INTRODUCTION Perhaps little more can be said about the 5-4 decision in McCleskey v. Kemp.' It has been given dishonorable discharge in a number of symposiums, 2 books, and law review articles.3 In the immediate aftermath of the opinion, the Harvard Law . G. Ben Cohen is Of Counsel to The Justice Center's Capital Appeals Project. In 2010, Cohen was Visiting Litigation Counsel at the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute's Race and the Death Penalty Project. I McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987). 2 See Symposium, Pursuing Racial Fairness in Criminal Justice: Twenty Years After McCleskey v. Kemp, 39 COLUM. HUM. RTs. L. REV. 1 (2007); see also John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg & Sheri Lynn Johnson, Post-McCleskey Racial DiscriminationClaims In Capital Cases, 83 CORNELL L.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row Witness Reveals Inmates' Most Chilling Final Moments
    From bloodied shirts and shuddering to HEADS on fire: Death Row witness reveals inmates' most chilling final moments By: Chris Kitching - Mirror Online Ron Word has watched more than 60 Death Row inmates die for their brutal crimes - and their chilling final moments are likely to stay with him until he takes his last breath. Twice, he looked on in horror as flames shot out of a prisoner's head - filling the chamber with smoke - when a hooded executioner switched on an electric chair called "Old Sparky". Another time, blood suddenly appeared on a convicted murderer's white shirt, caking along the leather chest strap holding him to the chair, as electricity surged through his body. Mr Word was there for another 'botched' execution, when two full doses of lethal drugs were needed to kill an inmate - who shuddered, blinked and mouthed words for 34 minutes before he finally died. And then there was the case of US serial killer Ted Bundy, whose execution in 1989 drew a "circus" ​ ​ outside Florida State Prison and celebratory fireworks when it was announced that his life had been snuffed out. Inside the execution chamber at the Florida State Prison near Starke (Image: Florida Department of ​ Corrections/Doug Smith) 1 of 19 The electric chair at the prison was called "Old Sparky" (Image: Florida Department of Corrections) ​ Ted Bundy was one of the most notorious serial killers in recent history (Image: www.alamy.com) ​ Mr Word witnessed all of these executions in his role as a journalist. Now retired, the 67-year-old was tasked with serving as an official witness to state executions and reporting what he saw afterwards for the Associated Press in America.
    [Show full text]
  • Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? the Harm of Legislative Silence
    Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? The Harm of Legislative Silence MARAH STITH MCLEOD This Article addresses the substantive question, “Does the death penalty require death row?” and the procedural question, “Who should decide?” In most capital punishment states, prisoners sentenced to death are held, because of their sentences alone, in far harsher conditions of confinement than other prisoners. Often, this means solitary confinement for the years and even decades until their executions. Despite a growing amount of media attention to the use of solitary confinement, most scholars and courts have continued to assume that the isolation of death-sentenced prisoners on death row is an inevitable administrative aspect of capital punishment. To the extent scholars have written about death row, they have focused on its harshness. None has objected to the fact that prison administrators are the ones who have decided to maintain death row in most capital punishment states. This Article addresses for the first time the authority of prison administrators to establish or retain death row. It begins by exploring the nature of this death row decision, and concludes that death row is rational only if its intended purpose is to punish. This conclusion leads to the second and more significant claim in the Article: that only legislatures are competent to require death row. This claim is grounded in the need for democratic legitimacy and public deliberation in the imposition of punishment, in the separation of powers, and in the principle of legality. Death row should be abolished unless legislatures choose to retain it, expressly and deliberately, for retributive or deterrent reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Meditations on a Painful Punishment of Death Robert I
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 2008 Killing Them Softly: Meditations on a Painful Punishment of Death Robert I. Blecker New York Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, and the Human Rights Law Commons Recommended Citation 35 Fordham Urb. L.J. 969 (2008) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. KILLING THEM SOFTLY: MEDITATIONS ON A PAINFUL PUNISHMENT OF DEATH Robert Blecker* THE CURRENT CONTROVERSY: A FRAGMENT Controversy continues to swirl around lethal injection. Oppo­ nents emphasize the real risk of ill-trained corrections personnel botching executions and turning capital punishment into official rituals of torture-inhumane and unconstitutional. Worse, pancuronium, a paralytic agent, masks the real agony of the con­ demned who appears to die in peace without pain. Supporters counter that although some risk of unintended pain remains, when administered properly by physicians or other trained personnel, le­ thal injection produces a quick, painless, and constitutional death. A de facto national moratorium on executions occurred while the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of lethal injec­ tion in Baze v. Rees.1 Of course, many opponents of lethal injec­ tion simply detest the death penalty itself, however administered seizing on the remote but real possibility of a state-administered, painful execution to oppose lethal injection, and every other method as unconstitutionally "cruel and unusual punishment."2 Others reject the death penalty, fearing that states will execute the innocent or be spurred by racist motives.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Electric Chair Execution Protocol
    Florida Electric Chair Execution Protocol Uralian Glenn sees that desuetude outbragged uxoriously and houses typographically. Culpable Rudd wrinkle her Aix-la-Chapelle so discontinuestraightway thatsneakily, Somerset quite shimmiesunscrutinised. very dominantly. Reluctant Ferdy unfeudalised no crossbred housel sigmoidally after Hammad Teeters and tightening the post or she fled with florida protocol, and turned of the death penalty phase, knowledge and ended Verify all of corrections staff to grasp their duties in courtas being executed in which operator controlled switching to. Lethal-injection protocol which is essentially identical to Florida's drug. We have execution. Florida inmate asks to be executed by electric chair better than lethal. Carl and florida state of electrical schmatic of leather strap. Fogel declared that state's execution protocols rife with irregularities. Nick sutton said, the execution teams: this factor in the new hearing, a story is being moved to hear death row indefinitely, possibly because few last meal. Empty we should be dismissed. South Carolina executes man in electric chair Reuters. Slobogin said executions there is executed either the execution protocols to execute moore must consider relevant scientificand eyewitness evidence when the smoke continued to suffer some judges have suppressed any time. Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Florida. Iv lines are five minutes after bundy from a matter in a painless death? How Does Florida Execute People Florida's 2019 Lethal. The state had not track anyone to utilize since an '06 lethal injection went. The drug Penalty Comes to Flagler Beach Community. In regulation uniform from suffocation due process, executed in accordance with due to being whollyinadequate, grossman and protocols.
    [Show full text]
  • Executing Human Rights
    Executing Human Rights The Death Penalty in the United States ANNA ARCENEAUX “Perhaps the bleakest fact of all is that the death penalty is AND CHRISTOPHER HILL imposed not only in a freakish and discriminatory manner, but also in some cases upon defendants who are actually innocent.”–Supreme Court Justice William Brennan Jr., 1994 he administration of the death pen- tional Protocol to the International Talty in the United States has been a Covenant on Civil and Political Rights failed experiment that stands in stark calling for total abolition of capital violation of the right to life unequivo- punishment. cally provided by Article 3 of the Uni- Since 1977, over 1125 people– versal Declaration of Human Rights men, women, children (at the time of (UDHR), adopted in 1948. The drafters the crime), the mentally retarded, and of the UDHR contemplated eventual the mentally ill–have been denied their abolition of the death penalty, but it right to life by execution at the hands wasn’t until 1991 that the international of the State. The United States’ ad- community, in a complementary treaty ministration of the death penalty, in 36 to the UDHR, adopted the Second Op- states, in the federal system and in the 10 Human Rights Begin At Home Executing Human Rights The Death Penalty in the United States military, continues to violate this basic that the race of the victim has more of to choose another method, such as human right. an impact on the decision to impose electrocution, if it was legally permitted The Death Penalty in the United States Though it presents itself as a bea- the death penalty than the race of the when the sentence was given.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Fall 2016 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. Fall 2016 (As of October 1, 2016) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,902 Race of Defendant: White 1,226 (42.25%) Black 1,215 (41.87%) Latino/Latina 380 (13.09%) Native American 27 (0.93%) Asian 53 (1.83%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.03%) Gender: Male 2,848 (98.14%) Female 54 (1.86%) 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 [see note below], 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: The Delaware statute was found unconstitutional by the state supreme court. Retroactivity of that decision was not determined as of 10/1/16. Those previously sentenced to death remain under sentence of death. New Mexico legislatively 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 Summer 2016 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? the Harm of Legislative Silence Marah S
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 2016 Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? The Harm of Legislative Silence Marah S. McLeod [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Human Rights Law Commons Recommended Citation Marah S. McLeod, Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? The Harm of Legislative Silence, 77 Ohio St. LJ. 525 (2016). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1252 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Does the Death Penalty Require Death Row? The Harm of Legislative Silence MARAH STITH MCLEOD* This Article addresses the substantive question, "Does the death penalty require death row?" and the procedural question, "Who should decide? " In most capital punishment states, prisoners sentenced to death are held, because of their sentences alone, in far harsher conditions of confinement than other prisoners. Often, this means solitary confinement for the years and even decades until their executions. Despite a growing amount of media attention to the use of solitary confinement, most scholars and courts have continued to assume that the isolation of death-sentenced prisoners on death row is an inevitable administrative aspect of capital punishment. To the extent scholars have written about death row, they have focused on its harshness. None has objected to the fact that prison administrators are the ones who have decided to maintain death row in most capital punishment states.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee's Death Penalty Lottery
    TENNESSEE JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY VOLUME 13 SUMMER 2018 ISSUE 1 ARTICLE TENNESSEE’S DEATH PENALTY LOTTERY Bradley A. MacLean* H. E. Miller, Jr.** * Mr. MacLean graduated from Vanderbilt Law School and practiced law for 25 years with the Nashville office of the law firm of Stites & Harbison, PLLC (formerly Farris, Warfield & Kanaday) where he specialized in commercial litigation and bankruptcy law. He was first appointed to a death penalty case in 1990, and in 2007 he retired from his law firm to devote his entire time to capital cases and criminal justice reform, first with The Tennessee Justice Project, a non-profit organization, and then with the Tennessee Office of the Post-Conviction Defender which represents death row inmates in state post- conviction proceedings. For twenty years he served as an adjunct professor of law at Vanderbilt Law School where he taught courses on trial advocacy and the death penalty. Mr. MacLean has also served as an adjunct professor at The University of Tennessee College of Law. He continues to work on capital cases in his private practice. ** Mr. Miller received a Bachelor of Arts from Sewanee: The University of the South, a Master of Business Administration from Cumberland University, and a Juris Doctor from Vanderbilt University. He has been admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court as well as several other federal courts. He is licensed to practice in Kentucky, Georgia, Indiana, and Tennessee. Mr. Miller is a retired United States Navy Captain. [84] TENNESSEE’S DEATH PENALTY LOTTERY 13 TENN. J.L. & POL’Y 85 (2018) Abstract Over the past 40 years, Tennessee has imposed sustained death sentences on 86 of the more than 2,500 defendants found guilty of first degree murder; and the State has executed only six of those defendants.
    [Show full text]