Advocate‘Ilie Vol. 1, No. 5 A bi-monthly publication of the Office for Public Advocacy Aug.,1979 NOTE DEFENDER OF THEMONTHEDITORSPUBLIC The August Newsletter is the first to go to print since the premeditated killing f John Spenkelink by the State of Florida. It is appropriate then, to lead this issue with the following article by Robert Pittman which appeared in the St. Petersburg Times of July 1, 1979, and is reprinted here with permission. THE VALUE OF A DOG’S LIFE AND A HUMAN LIFE This death warrant was signed, not by Gov. Bob Graham, but by the presi dent of Floridians Against Executions FAE. Rick Receveur, the Public Defender of the month, can truly be described as "Whereas the state of Florida has "a legend in his own time." Rick embarked on a series of executions; began his amazing public defender and whereas citizens of the state in career as an intern in the Jefferson order to form valid opinions of execu County Public Defender’s Office for tions need to know about them; and three semesters during law school at whereas the governor has arranged a the University of Louisville. When he deliberate program to hide the reality graduated from law school in 1975, he of executions from the citizens in became a full time public defender. whose name they are performed; now, He has served with tremendous compe therefore, is issued this warrant tency and dedication. directing the public execution of one Mixed Breed Dog at 8 a.m., The word in the Hall of Justice in Wednesday, July 4, 1979, at Fourth Louisville is that when Rick is street and Central Avenue in the city appointed to defend someone the pro of St. Petersburg, Fla." secutor immediately starts offering Continued, Page 15 Continued, Page 2 PROCEDURE Office the notification is APPELLATEto procure an extension of time in the circuit court In order to enable the Office For to have the record certified as being Public Advocacy to properly process complete. All notifications made an appeal for an indigent defendant pursuant to the regulation and statute from a circuit court to the appropriate should be sent to the Office For Public appellate court, local public defenders Advocacy in care of Tim Riddell. If must comply promptly with the regu any questions arise concerning appel lation and statute governing the pro late procedure, feel free to contact cessing of appeals. See 504 KAR Tim at 502-564-5214 and he will be glad 1:030 and KRS 31.115. The regula to answer them. tion and statute were promuglated for the sole purpose of ensuring that an indigent defendant will be timely Continued from Page 1 afforded his constitutional right to appeal if he desires to appeal his good deals. Rick has been a principal conviction. participant in the Death Penalty Task Force at the Louisville PD office and Once. the defendant does express his has tried a number of capital cases. desire to appeal and once the notice of None of his clients have been sen appeal and the designation of record tenced to death. He has also fought have been duly filed, the local public hard to prevent the prosecutors from defender should immediately notify the seeking the death penalty in cases Office For Public Advocacy in Frank- where the crime charged was allegedly fort if he wishes the Office to handle committed before the new statute was that defendant’s appeal. Included in enacted. Rick’s anti-death penalty that notification must be the following: work has been outstanding. I the defendant’s name, his present address, and, if the defendant is not The case of which Rick is the proudest in one of the penal institutions, his is Charles Erwin Williams. Mr. Williams telephone number; 2 the name, was sentenced to two life sentences for address and telephone number of the murder and robbery after a jury trial. court reporter; 3 a statement indi Rick then uncovered evidence that the cating whether or not the defendant prosecutor had arranged for the chief has been released on bail pending the prosecuting witness to receive very appeal and, if so, the amount of the favorable treatment and concealed that bail; and, 4 a brief statement of any fact at trial. Rick won a new trial for suspected errors which occurred Mr. Williams on appeal. Williams v. during the trial. Certified copies of Commonwealth, Ky., 569 S.W.2d 139 the final judgment and the notice of 1979. Williams is now free on bond. appeal should be sent with the notifi cation. Rick is always willing to take time out from his very busy schedule to talk Once this notification is received in with a fellow attorney who has a the Office For Public Advocacy, the puzzling problem. He also manages to primary responsibility for processing play his banjo with a bluegrass group the appeal to the appropriate appellate on the side. court falls within the hands of the Office; however, it must be remem Unfortunately for the public defender bered that a local public defender’s system Rick, who has just tried three responsibility for his defendant’s case capital cases in a month, has resigned continues until the record on appeal is as of August I to begin private prac filed in the appropriate appellate tice. We thank him for the incredible clerk’s office an example of what a job he has done during his long public local public defender may be called defender career. upon to do subsequent to sending our -2- ____ ____ NOTE- Protection & Advocacy for theDevelopmentally Disabled UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT June 12, 1979. "The Supreme Court RULES ON WHETHER COLLEGE MUST ruled unanimously yesterday that MODIFY CLINICAL NURSING PROGRAM educatibn institutions don’t have to TO ADMIT HEARING IMPAIRED STU lower or substantially modify their DENT standards to admit handicapped per sons." Based in part on "It Isn’t the Greatest, But Put Away the Hemlock: Fortunately, the Supreme Court’s The Supreme Court’s decision in decision was neither that broad nor Southestern Community College v. that negative. The narrow issue Davis or Don’t Get Your Legal Analysis which the Court addressed was stated From the News Media" by Robert L. at the beginning of the opinion as Burgdorf, Jr., copies of which are follows: available upon request to Marie Allison 1-800-372-2988. "This case presents a matter of first impression for this Court: Whether On July 11, 1979, the Supreme Court Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of of the United States in a unanimous 1973, which prohibits discrimination decision ruled for the first time on the against an ‘otherwise qualified handi merits of a claim under Section 504 of capped individual’ in federally funded the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This programs ‘solely by reason of his Act prohibits discrimination against an handicap,’ forbids professional schools otherwise qualified handicapped indi from imposing physical qualifications vidual in federally funded programs for admission to their clinical training "solely by reason of his handicap." programs." The case, Southeastern Community College v. Davis, U.S. 47 As can be seen, the scope of the deci L.W. 4689, involved a woman who sion was actually so narrow as to only suffers from a serious hearing dis apply to consideration by professional ability and was denied admission to the schools in relation to their admissions nursing program of Southeastern qualifications to their clinical training Community College because that facility programs. believed that her hearing disability made it impossible for her to partici The outcome of the decision reflects pate safely in the normal clinical the limited precedential value of the training program or to care safely for case: patients. "Nothing in the language or history of The reaction to this decision by the Section 504 reflects an intention to news media was to distort the impact limit the freedom of an educational and import of the decision by printing institution to require reasonable statements similar to the fbllowing physical qualifications for admission to banner headline which appeared on a clinical training program. Nor has Page A-i of the Washington Post on there been any showing in this case Continued, Page 4 -3- that any action short of a substantial issue of whether a private cause of change in Southeastern’s program action exists under Section 504, it would render unreasonable the quali implicitly ruled that there is such a fications it imposed." emphasis cause by virtue of its addressing the added merits of the case. It could have U failed to decide the case on a juris It is thus apparent that the Court dictional basis and ruled specifically limited the impact of its decision that there is no private cause of through its specific statement of the action. issue and by its reliance upon the "reasonableness" of the qualifications There are obviously also some negative sought to be imposed. Accordingly, aspets to the case which must be whether or not an advocate agrees acknbwledged: with the Court’s subjective deter mination of what constituted "rea 1 The Court’s decision allows sonable" accommodations in the context colleges to continue to design their of this particular fact situation, the clinical programs in a generalized advocate certainly has the opportunity manner, requiring aM clinical program to distinguish this case factually from students to learn a vast array of one 1n which she or he is seeking skills. Thus, even though a handi reasonable accommodations under capped student may be capable of Section 504. mastering a limited number of skills which would qualify him or her for a Despite the fact that many advocates specialized practice or for a particular for handicapped persons view this job, that student may be denied the decision with disappointment, there are opportunity to receive that training some position aspects to the decision: solely because the handicap prevents the person from participating in the 1 The Court interpreted the total training program.