DOCSLIB.ORG

Death Row USA Winter 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Death Row USA Winter 2016 DEATH ROW U.S.A. Winter 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. Winter 2016 (As of January 1, 2016) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,943 Race of Defendant: White 1,251 (42.51%) Black 1,227 (41.69%) Latino/Latina 383 (13.01%) Native American 30 (1.02%) Asian 51 (1.73%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.03%) Gender: Male 2,888 (98.13%) Female 55 (1.87%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 34 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 19 Alaska, Connecticut, 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 [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively.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 Summer 2015 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2015 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Fourth Amendment Bernard v. Minnesota, No. 14-1470 (Criminalization of refusal to take blood alcohol test) (decision below 859 N.W.2d 762 (Minn. 2015)) Consolidated with Beylund v. Levi, No. 14-1507 (decision below 859 N.W.2d 403 (ND 2015)) Birchfield v. North Dakota, No. 14-1468 (decision below 858 N.W.2d 302 (ND 2015)) Question Presented: In the absence of a warrant, may a State may make it a crime for a person to refuse to take a chemical test to detect the presence of alcohol in the person's blood? Utah v. Strieff, No. 14-1373 (Arrest pursuant to outstanding warrant uncovered during unlawful investigatory stop) (decision below 2015 WL 223953 (1/16/15)) Question Presented: Should evidence seized incident to a lawful arrest on an outstanding warrant be suppressed because the warrant was discovered during an investigatory stop later found to be unlawful? Fifth Amendment Luis v. United States, No. 14-419 (Government freezing assets needed to hire lawyer) (decision below 564 Fed. Appx. 493 (11th Cir. 2014)) Question Presented: Does the pretrial restraint of a criminal defendant's legitimate, untainted assets (those not traceable to a criminal offense) needed to retain counsel of choice violate the 5th and 6th Amendments? Sixth Amendment Betterman v. Montana, No. 14-1457 (Speedy Trial requirements for sentencing phase) (decision below 342 P.3d 971 (Mont. 2015)) Question Presented: Does the 6th Amendment's Speedy Trial Clause apply to the sentencing phase of a criminal prosecution, protecting a criminal defendant from inordinate delay in final disposition of his case? Hurst v. Florida, No. 14-7505 (Constitutionality of Florida death-sentencing scheme) (decision below 147 So. 3d 435 (Fla. 2014)) Question Presented: Does Florida's death sentencing scheme violate the 6th or 8th Amendments in light of this Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U. S. 584 (2002)? (See also cases under Eighth Amendment, below) Luis v. United States, No. 14-419 (Government freezing assets needed to hire lawyer) (decision below 564 Fed. Appx. 493 (11th Cir. 2014)) Question Presented: (See cases under Fifth Amendment, above) Death Row U.S.A. Page 2 Maryland v. Kulbicki, No. 14–848 (Ineffective assistance of counsel) (decision below 99 A. 3d 730, 735 (Md. Ct. App. 2014)) Question Presented: Did the Maryland Court of Appeals properly vacate Kulbiki’s conviction on the grounds that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorneys failed to question the legitimacy of the ballistics evidence presented against him? Decision: In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that Kulbicki’s attorneys were not ineffective. His trial was in 1995 when comparative bullet analysis was widely accepted. It was not until 2003 that such evidence was found to be based on bogus science. Although there was a 1991 report questioning the science, counsel was not ineffective for not discovering the report. White v. Wheeler, No. 14–1372 (Exclusion of juror, death-qualification) (decision below Wheeler v. Simpson, 779 F.3d 366 (6th Cir. 2015)) Question Presented: (See cases under Cases Raising Habeas Corpus Questions) Eighth Amendment Hurst v. Florida, No. 14-7505 (Constitutionality of Florida death-sentencing scheme) (decision below 147 So. 3d 435 (Fla. 2014)) Question Presented: (See cases under Sixth Amendment, above) Kansas v. Jonathan Carr, No. 14-449 (Jury instructions on burden of proof of mitigators and severance) (decision below 329 P.3d 1195 (Kansas 2014)). Consolidated with Kansas v. Reginald Carr, No. 14-450 (decision below 331 P.3d 544 (Kansas 2014)) Questions Presented: (1) Does the 8th Amendment require that a capital-sentencing jury be affirmatively instructed that mitigating circumstances "need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt," as the Kansas Supreme Court held here, or instead whether the 8th Amendment is satisfied by instructions that, in context, make clear that each juror must individually assess and weigh any mitigating circumstances? (2) Does the trial court's decision not to sever the sentencing phase of the co-defendant brothers' trial here -- a decision that comports with the traditional approach preferring joinder in circumstances like this -- violate an 8th Amendment right to an "individualized sentencing" determination and was not harmless in any event? Kansas v. Gleason, No. 14-452 (Jury instructions on burden of proof of mitigators) (decision below 329 P.3d 1102 (Kansas 2014)) Question Presented: Does the 8th Amendment require that a capital-sentencing jury be affirmatively instructed that mitigating circumstances "need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt," as the Kansas Supreme Court held in this case, or instead whether the 8th Amendment is satisfied by instructions that, in context, make clear that each juror must individually assess and weigh any mitigating circumstances? Williams v. Pennsylvania, No. 15-5040 (Former prosecuting attorney as judge on case he prosecuted) (decision below 105 A.3d 1234 (Pa. 2015)) Question Presented: Are the 8th and 14th Amendments violated by the participation of a potentially biased jurist on a multimember tribunal deciding a capital case, regardless of whether his vote is ultimately decisive? Death Row U.S.A. Page 3 Fourteenth Amendment Foster v. Chatman, No. 14-8349 (Batson standard) (decision below Sup. Ct. Ga. Case No. S14e0771 (Nov. 3, 2014)) Question Presented: Did the Georgia courts err in failing to recognize race discrimination under Batson in the extraordinary circumstances of this death penalty case? Williams v. Pennsylvania, No. 15-5040 (Former prosecuting attorney as judge on case he prosecuted) (decision below 105 A.3d 1234 (Pa. 2015)) (See cases under Eighth Amendment, above) 2. CASES RAISING HABEAS CORPUS QUESTIONS Duncan v. Owens, 14-1516 (Grant of habeas for inference of motive in criminal case) (decision below 781 F.3d 360 (7th Cir. 2015)) Question Presented: Did the 7th Circuit violate 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and a long line of USSC decisions by awarding habeas relief in the absence of clearly established precedent from the Court? Montgomery v. Louisiana, No. 14-280 (Retroactivity of decision prohibiting mandatory life sentences for juveniles) (decision below 141 So. 3d 264 (La. 2014)) Questions Presented: (1) Does Miller v. Alabama adopt a new substantive rule that applies retroactively on collateral review to people condemned as juveniles to die in prison? (2) (Added by the Court) Does the Court have jurisdiction to decide whether the Supreme Court of Louisiana correctly refused to give retroactive effect in this case to Miller? White v. Wheeler, No. 14–1372 (Exclusion of juror, death-qualification) (decision below Wheeler v. Simpson, 779 F.3d 366 (6th Cir. 2015)) Question Presented: (1) Did the 6th Circuit disregard the highly deferential standards Congress imposed in 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254(d)(1), (d)(2) and (e)(1), and the deference owed to trial court’s factual finding of juror bias required by Wainwright v. Witt, when it granted habeas relief on Wheeler’s Witherspoon/Witt claim? (2) Should a violation of Witherspoon/Witt be subject to harmless error analysis? Decision: In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the 6th Circuit failed to give the double deference due to state trial court findings in Witherspoon/Witt claims in habeas. The Kentucky Supreme Court was not unreasonable in its application of clearly established federal law when it concluded that the exclusion of Juror 638 did not violate the 6th Amendment. The Court did not address the second question, given its resolution of the first. 3. CASES RAISING OTHER IMPORTANT FEDERAL QUESTIONS Lockhart v. United States, No. 14-8358 (Interpretation of criminal statutes) (decision below 749 F.3d 148 (2nd Cir. 2014)) Question Presented: Is § 2252(b)(2)'s mandatory minimum sentence triggered by a prior conviction under a state law relating to "aggravated sexual abuse" or "sexual abuse," even though the conviction did not "involv[e] a minor or ward," an issue that divides the federal courts of appeals? Death Row U.S.A. Page 4 Molina-Martinez v. United States, No. 14-8913 (Plain error review and affect on substantial rights) (decision below 588 Fed. Appx. 333 (5th Cir. 2014)) Question Presented: Where an error in the application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines results in the application of the wrong Guideline range to a criminal defendant, should an appellate court presume, for purposes of plain-error review under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), that the error affected the defendant's substantial rights? Mullenix v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2017 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2017 (As of July 1, 2017) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,817 Race of Defendant: White 1,196 (42.46%) Black 1,168 (41.46%) Latino/Latina 373 (13.24%) Native American 26 (0.92%) Asian 53 (1.88%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,764 (98.12%) Female 53 (1.88%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2017 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 or 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS First Amendment Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194 (Use of websites by sex offender) (decision below 777 S.E.2d 738 (N.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime & Justice
    CRIME & JUSTICE Abolishing the Death Penalty This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of IPS and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union. 4 IMPRINT © Inter Press Service (IPS) International Association Publisher: IPS-Inter Press Service Europa gGmbH European Regional Office Marienstr. 19/20 D-10117 Berlin Coordinator: Ramesh Jaura Editor: Petar Hadji-Ristic Layout: Birgit Weisenburger, Berlin Photos: Diverse sources duly acknowledged inside Printed in Germany, November 2007 5 CONTENTS PREFACE 6 MARIO LUBETKIN, IPS DIRECTOR-GENERAL HELP STOP CYCLE OF REVENGE 7 ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA 9 AFRICA 35 MIDEAST & MEDITERRANEAN 61 ASIA - PACIFIC 93 LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN 147 U.N. & USA 169 6 Mario Lubetkin Preface Rome - It was a historic year. In 2007 the tide of opinion against The reports are immensely varied. They range from NGO websites and copied into diverse human rights blogs. the death penalty gathered in strength as never before, sweeping dispatches from Central Asia to one on the bunged lethal The reports represent a part of IPS coverage on the death to every corner of the world. The number of abolitionist coun- injection execution in Florida that dragged out for minutes - penalty. News stories for the general IPS service have not tries rose. The number of executions declined. Long in place 34 excruciatingly painful ones - not seconds. As a follow-up been included. moratoriums held and new ones came into force. And as the year to this, an IPS correspondent reports on the U.S.
    [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]
  • Strickland V. United States - Altlaw
    Strickland v. United States - AltLaw http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/408964 (/) Simple Search (/v1/search) Advanced Search (/v1/search/advanced) Boolean Search (/v1/search/boolean) Enter a case name, citation, or key words and phrases: About AltLaw (/v1/about) Case Coverage (/v1/about/coverage) Browse All Cases (/v1/cases) Browse U.S. Code (/v1/codes/us) May 14, 1984 United States Supreme Court Strickland v. United States Cite as: hide (#) (AltLaw cannot guarantee this citation is correct — double check!) 466 U.S. 668 Show full citation (#) This case cites: 1984 United States v. Cronic (/v1/cases/400627) Autry v. McKaskle (/v1/cases/403865) Javor v. United States (/v1/cases/444524) Pulley v. Harris (/v1/cases/393366) 1983 United States v. Trapnell (/v1/cases/550424) Stephens v. Kemp (/v1/cases/386717) Sullivan v. Wainwright (/v1/cases/399155) Burger v. Zant (/v1/cases/423401) Autry v. Estelle (/v1/cases/381166) Barclay v. Florida (/v1/cases/398003) Barefoot v. Estelle (/v1/cases/398270) Zant v. Stephens (/v1/cases/383096) 1 of 169 8/29/2008 8:34 AM Strickland v. United States - AltLaw http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/408964 1982 Standard v. Swint (/v1/cases/407607) Frady v. United States (/v1/cases/381118) Engle v. Isaac (/v1/cases/391293) Rose v. Lundy (/v1/cases/396134) In Eddings v. Oklahoma (/v1/cases/382622) 1981 Bullington v. Missouri (/v1/cases/387991) U.S. v. Morrison (/v1/cases/391141) 1980 United States v. Beck (/v1/cases/384124) In Cuyler v. Sullivan (/v1/cases/387242) 1979 Green v. Georgia (/v1/cases/382645) Rummel v. Estelle (/v1/cases/524461) 1978 Cooper v.
    [Show full text]
  • The Correctional Peace Officers Foundation National Honor Guard
    CPO FAMILY Autumn 2017 A Publication of The CPO Foundation Vol. 27, No. 2 The Correctional Peace Officers Foundation National Honor Guard To see the CPOF National Honor Guard members “up close and personal,” go to pages 24-25. Bravery Above and Beyond the Call of Duty See page 20 for the inspiring stories of these three life-saving Corrections Professionals whose selfless acts of Sgt. Mark Barra bravery “off the job” Calipatria State Prison, CA earned them much- Lt. John Mendiboure Lt. Christopher Gainey deserved recognition at Avenal SP, CA Pender Correctional Project 2000 XXVIII. Institution, NC Inside, starting on page 4: PROJECT 2000 XXVIII ~ June 15-18, 2017, San Francisco, CA 1 Field Representatives CPO FAMILY Jennifer Donaldson Davis Alabama Carolyn Kelley Alabama The Correctional Peace Officers Foundation Ned Entwisle Alaska 1346 N. Market Blvd. • Sacramento, CA 95834 Liz Shaffer-Smith Arizona P. O. Box 348390 • Sacramento, CA 95834-8390 Annie Norman Arkansas 916.928.0061 • 800.800.CPOF Connie Summers California cpof.org Charlie Bennett California Guy Edmonds Colorado Directors of The CPO Foundation Kim Blakley Federal Glenn Mueller Chairman/National Director George Meshko Federal Edgar W. Barcliff, Jr. Vice Chairman/National Director Laura Phillips Federal Don Dease Secretary/National Director John Williams Florida Richard Waldo Treasurer/National Director Donald Almeter Florida Salvador Osuna National Director Jim Freeman Florida Jim Brown National Director Vanessa O’Donnell Georgia Kim Potter-Blair National Director Rose Williams
    [Show full text]
  • Notes the Writing Is on the Wall: How the Briseno Factors Create an Unacceptable Risk of Executing Persons with Intellectual Disability*
    CROWELL.TOPRINTER (DO NOT DELETE) 2/29/2016 3:07 PM Notes The Writing Is on the Wall: How the Briseno Factors Create an Unacceptable Risk of Executing Persons * with Intellectual Disability I. Introduction In 2002, the Supreme Court held in Atkins v. Virginia1 that the execution of intellectually disabled people is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.2 When Atkins was decided, Texas did not have a statute governing how intellectual disability claims should proceed in the capital context, so Texas’s highest criminal court, the Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA), created the legal framework to govern these claims.3 Notably, the CCA did more than create procedural rules to govern Atkins claims; citing concerns about whether Texans believe that all intellectually disabled capital offenders should be exempted from the death penalty, the CCA created a distinctive and restrictive approach to determining intellectual disability. Recently though, in Hall v. Florida,4 the Supreme Court held a Florida practice unconstitutional because it was restrictive and diverged from professional norms.5 This Note serves as a comprehensive evaluation of Texas’s approach in theory and practice, highlighting its departure from Atkins and Hall and the important policy objectives that guided those decisions. * I would like to thank Professor Jordan Steiker—my guide through law school—for all of the support and advice these last few years, not to mention the idea for, and countless edits of, this Note. I would also like to thank my mothers for perpetually encouraging me to fight for justice, all the while making sure my grammar was on point.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Fall 2020 A quarterly report by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins Consultant to the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Fall 2020 (As of October 1, 2020) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2553 (2553 – 180* - 877M = 1496 enforceable sentences) Race of Defendant: White 1,076 (42.15%) Black 1,062 (41.60%) Latino/Latina 343 (13.44%) Native American 24 (0.94%) Asian 47 (1.84%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,502 (98.00%) Female 51 (2.00%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 30 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, CaliforniaM, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, OregonM, PennsylvaniaM, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. M States where a moratorium prohibiting execution has been imposed by the Governor. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 23 Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire [see note below], New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Hampshire repealed the death penalty prospectively. The man already sentenced remains under sentence of death.] * Designates the number of people in non-moratorium states who are not under active death sentence because of court reversal but whose sentence may be reimposed. M Designates the number of people in states where a gubernatorial moratorium on execution has been imposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Winter 2005 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Director of Research and Student Services, Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Winter 2005 (As of January 1, 2005) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 3,455 Race of Defendant: White 1,576 (45.62%) Black 1,444 (41.79%) Latino/Latina 356 (10.30%) Native American 39 ( 1.13%) Asian 40 ( 1.16%) Unknown at this issue 1 ( .03%) Gender: Male 3,401 (98.44%) Female 54 ( 1.56%) Juveniles: Male 79 ( 2.29%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTES: 40 (Underlined jurisdiction has statute 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: 13 Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 Alaska, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. Death Row U.S.A. Page 2 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Fall 2004 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2004 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Fourth Amendment Devenpeck v. Alford, No. 03-710 (Probable cause to arrest and qualified immunity) (decision below Alford v.
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Winter 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. Winter 2020 (As of January 1, 2020) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2620 (2,620 – 189* - 906M = 1525 enforceable sentences) Race of Defendant: White 1,103 (42.10%) Black 1,089 (41.56%) Latino/Latina 353 (13.47%) Native American 27 (1.03%) Asian 47 (1.79%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,567 (97.98%) Female 53 (2.02%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 31 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, CaliforniaM, ColoradoM, 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: 22 Alaska, 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]
  • Penix Representing News and Feature Formats
    SELECTED STORIES By LEONARD “LEN” PENIX REPRESENTING NEWS AND FEATURE FORMATS Leonard N. Penix, J.D., has written more than 7,500 published articles over the course of his 30-year career in daily newspaper journalism, many distributed nationwide via the Scripps-Howard and Associated Press wire services. More than half have been published online. These are samples from the major categories of newspaper writing: police, courts, short features, environmental affairs, government and politics, health and human services, education and business. ________________ INDEX Police 2-12 Health and Human Services 13-16 Features 17-34 Courts 35-45 Environment 46-51 Government and Politics 52-55 Business 56-62 Education 63-71 ________________ 1 POLICE This is one in a series of profiles Professor Penix has written for The Post about so-called "2 percenters," or hard-core bikers who lead a sophisticated, multi-state crime syndicate. This story was written about the Outlaws, a national group with thousands of members and a club in Dayton, Ohio. It was published shortly after a shootout between the Outlaws and a rival Cincinnati gang called the Iron Horsemen at Vic's Brew and Cue, a bar in Clermont County. More than 350 rounds were exchanged during the shootout, police said. Jan. 28, 1989 he distant chorus of a hundred Harleys began to pierce the cemetery quiet. The thanatotic moan grew louder, became a roar, T then a deafening dirge, as the army of bikers entered the cemetery gates. Police officers in a dozen cruisers, afraid of causing a disturbance, waited just beyond the gates as the Outlaws arrived Friday to bury one of their own.
    [Show full text]