No. ______ In the Supreme Court of the United States __________________ MARIO DION WOODWARD, Petitioner, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent. __________________ On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Alabama Supreme Court __________________ PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI __________________ JEFFREY L. GLATZER JAMES C. MARTIN GEOFFREY G. YOUNG Counsel of Record JOHN P. KENNEDY REED SMITH LLP TALIA N. FIANO 225 Fifth Avenue REED SMITH LLP Pittsburgh, PA 15222 599 Lexington Avenue (412) 288-3131 New York, NY 10022 [email protected] (212) 521-5400 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Petitioner April 10, 2019 Becker Gallagher · Cincinnati, OH · Washington, D.C. · 800.890.5001 i CAPITAL CASE QUESTIONS PRESENTED Pursuant to Ala. C. § 13-A-5-47(e)(1975), Alabama previously allowed trial judges to override a jury’s vote for a life sentence and, based on new evidence, impose the death penalty. Although Alabama’s courts steadfastly have held otherwise, this judicial capital sentencing process conflicts with the reasoning and holding in Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. , 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016). Now, Alabama’s override statute has been repealed, but the state has elected not to apply its repealer retroactively. The death sentence imposed by judicial override in this case accordingly raises two dispositive questions: 1. Does the imposition of a death sentence through judicial override under a now-repealed statute violate the constitutional guarantees implemented by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments? 2. Does a trial judge’s override of a jury’s life sentence and imposition of a death sentence based on evidence not considered by the jury violate the constitutional guarantees implemented by the Sixth Amendment? ii TABLE OF CONTENTS QUESTIONS PRESENTED................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES................... iv OPINIONS BELOW..........................1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION............. 1 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOKED.... 2 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT................. 3 STATEMENT OF THE CASE.................. 7 REASONS TO GRANT THIS WRIT ............ 11 I. MR. WOODWARD’S DEATH SENTENCE VIOLATES THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS BECAUSE IT OFFENDS UNIFORM NOTIONS OF DECENCY AND HAS BEEN ARBITRARILY AND DISCRIMINATORILY IMPOSED...............................12 II. MR. WOODWARD’S DEATH SENTENCE VIOLATES THE SIXTH AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT IS THE RESULT OF JUDICIAL, NOT JURY, FACT-FINDING.............. 19 CONCLUSION.............................23 APPENDIX Appendix A Certificate of Judgment in the Supreme Court of Alabama (November 16, 2018) ........App. 1 iii Appendix B Notice in the Court of Criminal Appeals State of Alabama (July 27, 2018) .............App. 3 Appendix C Opinion in the Court of Criminal Appeals State of Alabama (April 27, 2018) ............App. 5 Appendix D Order in the Circuit Criminal Court of Montgomery County, Alabama (October 9, 2015) .........App. 156 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000)........................ 9 Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002).................... 13, 14 City of Cleburne, Tex. v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985)....................... 18 Clemons v. Mississippi, 494 U.S. 738 (1990)....................... 13 Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977)....................... 14 Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982)....................... 17 Ex parte Bohannon, 222 So.3d 525 (Ala. 2016) ............. 5, 10, 11 Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)..................... 6, 17 Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349 (1977)..................... 6, 12 Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976)..................... 6, 12 Hopper v. Evans, 456 U.S. 605 (1982)....................... 17 Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. ____, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) ..... passim v Johnson v. Alabama, 136 S. Ct. 1837 (2016)..................... 10 Kirksey v. Alabama, 136 S. Ct. 2409 (2016)..................... 10 Maynard v. Cartwright, 486 U.S. 356 (1988).................... 17, 18 McClesky v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987)....................... 15 Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989)....................... 13 Powell v. State, 153 A.3d 69 (Del. 2016)..................... 3 Rauf v. State, 145 A.3d 430 (Del. 2016)................. 3, 10 Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)................... passim Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005)....................... 14 State of Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber, 329 U.S. 459 (1947)....................... 13 Stringer v. Black, 503 U.S. 222 (1992)....................... 12 Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958)........................ 13 Turner v. Murray, 476 U.S. 28 (1986)........................ 15 vi United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992)........................ 11 Verizon Comm. Inc. v. FCC, 535 U.S. 467 (2002)....................... 11 Walker v. Georgia, 555 U.S. 979, 129 S. Ct. 453 (Mem.) (2008) .............................. 12, 15 Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 (1990)....................... 20 Wimbley v. Alabama, 136 S. Ct. 2387 (2016)..................... 10 Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976)........................ 6 Woodward v. Alabama, 571 U.S. 1045, 134 S. Ct. 405 (2013) ..... 4, 9, 15 Woodward v. State, 123 So.3d 989 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011) ......... 8 Woodward v. State, So.3d , 2011 WL 6278294 (Ala. Crim. App. Aug. 24, 2012) .............. 8 Woodward v. State, So.3d , 2018 WL 1981390 (Apr. 27, 2018)......................... 5, 10 CONSTITUTION AND STATUTES U.S. Const. amend. VI................... passim U.S. Const. amend. VIII.................. passim vii U.S. Const. amend. XIV.................. passim 28 U.S.C. § 1257 ............................. 1 Ala. Code § 13A-5-47......................... 3 2016 Fla. Sess. L. Serv. Ch. 2016-13 (H.B. 7101) (West).................................. 3 OTHER AUTHORITIES Alabama Inmates Currently on Death Row, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (Mar. 21, 2019), available at http://www.doc.state.al. us/DeathRow............................. 6 Alabama Overrides from Life to Death, EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE (Jan. 12, 2016), available at https://eji.org/reports/death-penalty-alabama- judge-override............................ 6 Emad H. Atiq, Legal vs. Factual Normative Questions & the True Scope of Ring, 32 NOTRE DAME J.L. ETHICS & PUB. POL’Y 47 (2018) ..... 22 Equal Justice Initiative, The Death Penalty in Alabama: Judicial Override 11 (2011)........................... 3, 4, 15, 16 Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Madison v. Alabama, 139 S. Ct. 718 (2019) (No. 17-7505) .......... 16 Robert F. Schopp, Justifying Capital Punishment in Principle & in Practice: Empirical Evidence of Distortion in Application, 81 NEB. L. REV. 805 (2002).................................. 18 viii Symposium, Politics and the Death Penalty: Can Rational Discourse and Due Process Survive the Perceived Political Pressure?, 21 FORDHAM URBAN L.J. 239 (1994) .................... 15 Jeffrey Wermer, The Jury Requirement in Death Sentencing After Hurst v. Florida, 94 DENV. L. REV. 385 (2017) .......................... 22 1 OPINIONS BELOW The Circuit Court of Montgomery County’s order denying Petitioner’s request for post-conviction relief from a sentence of death is attached as Appendix D. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion denying Petitioner’s appeal of the denial of his request for post-conviction relief from a sentence of death is attached as Appendix C. The denial of Petitioner’s motion for rehearing is attached as Appendix B. The denial of Petitioner’s certiorari petition to the Alabama Supreme Court is attached as Appendix A. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION Alabama’s Court of Criminal Appeals issued its opinion denying post-conviction relief on April 27, 2018. Rehearing was denied on July 27, 2018. Petitioner filed his petition for certiorari with the Alabama Supreme Court on August 10, 2018, and certiorari was denied on November 16, 2018.1 This Court’s jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1257. In imposing his death sentence, Mr. Woodward maintains that the State of Alabama has violated his constitutional rights under the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. 1 On January 24, 2019, this Court granted Mr. Woodward an extension of time, until April 15, 2019, within which to file a petition for a writ of certiorari. 2 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOKED The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of 3 law; nor deny to any