On January 18, the U.S. Supreme Court (7-2) ordered a new hearing in federal court for Cory Maples, an Alabama death row inmate whose state and federal appeals had been rejected by lower courts because his lawyers quit and missed a critical filing deadline. Writing for six of the Court’s Justices, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg highlighted the poor quality of representation offered by the state in death penalty cases. The opinion stated, “Alabama sets low eligibility requirements for lawyers appointed to represent indigent capital defendants at trial…. Appointed counsel need only be a member of the Alabama bar and have ‘five years’ prior experience in the active practice of criminal law.’ Experience with capital cases is not required.” Justice Ginsburg also noted that Alabama is nearly alone in not guaranteeing representation in post-conviction proceedings, electing instead “to rely on the efforts of well-funded [out-of-state] volunteers.” Finally, the opinion emphasized that appointed counsel in death penalty cases are severely under compensated by the state: “Although death penalty litigation is plainly time intensive, the State capped at $1,000 fees recoverable by capital defense attorneys for out-of- court work. Even today, court-appointed attorneys receive only $70 per hour.” The Court finally noted that "On occasion, some prisoners sentenced to death receive no postconviction representation at all." Maples's underlying claim, which he was prevented from appealing because his absent lawyers missed the deadline, was that he received ineffective representation at trial. Neither of his trial counsel had ever tried the penalty phase of a capital case.
Professor Victor Streib (pictured) of the Ohio Northern University Law School has published the latest edition of his periodic reports, Death Penalty for Female Offenders. This study offers statistics and information related to women who have been executed or are currently on death row. Among the report’s findings are: 
Jim Petro (pictured), former Attorney General of Ohio, strongly supported the death penalty as a state legislator, believed the state would save money because of the death penalty, and that it would act as a deterrent. But, he recently said, "Neither of those things have occurred, so I ask myself, 'Why would I vote for it again?' I don't think I would. I don't think the law has done anything to benefit society and us. It's cheaper and, in my view, sometimes a mistake can be made, so perhaps we are better off with life without parole." He added, "We are probably safer, better and smarter to not have a death penalty." Many of Petro's concerns are in his book, False Justice: Eight Myths that Convict the Innocent, in which he underscores the risks of mistake and identifies flaws in how police and prosecutors have handled capital cases. He also noted that many prosecutors recognize these problems: "I would bet certainly well over half the prosecutors in the country looking at this book would ultimately agree with most of the issues," he said.
On January 23, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by the state of Ohio challenging the unconditional writ of habeas corpus and bar to the re-prosecution of Joe D'Ambrosio (pictured), thus ending the capital case. He has now been freed from death row with all charges dismissed. A federal District Court had first overturned D'Ambrosio's conviction in 2006 because the state had withheld key evidence from the defense. The federal court originally allowed the state to re-prosecute him, but just before trial the state revealed the existence of even more important evidence and requested further delay. Also the state did not divulge in a timely manner that the key witness against D'Ambrosio had died. In 2010, the District Court barred D’Ambrosio’s re-prosecution because of the prosecutors’ misconduct. The court concluded that these developments biased D'Ambrosio's chances for a fair trial, and hence the state was barred from retrying him. District Court Judge Kathleen O'Malley wrote: “For 20 years, the State held D’Ambrosio on death row, despite wrongfully withholding evidence that ‘would have substantially increased a reasonable juror’s doubt of D’Ambrosio’s guilt.’ Despite being ordered to do so by this Court … the State still failed to turn over all relevant and material evidence relating to the crime of which D’Ambrosio was convicted. Then, once it was ordered to provide D’Ambrosio a constitutional trial or release him within 180 days, the State did neither. During those 180 days, the State engaged in substantial inequitable conduct, wrongfully retaining and delaying the production of yet more potentially exculpatory evidence… To fail to bar retrial in such extraordinary circumstances surely would fail to serve the interests of justice.”
A new study by the organization Together Against the Death Penalty examined the status of capital punishment in the U.S. through a series of interviews and visits to death penalty states in 2010. The report, 999 - The Death Penalty in the United States, was written by Arnaud Gaillard and it exposes some of the serious problems with capital punishment in this country from a human rights perspective. The report calls on decision-makers to take a closer look at the conditions of those awaiting execution and at the risk of arbitrariness in the implementation of the death penalty. Gaillard wrote, “Indeed death rows are not full of innocents. Some of them have committed horrible crimes… When one looks closer, it is likely that the authors of the worst ills in American society are not necessarily the ones found on death row. With luck, sufficient funds and networks, the privileged have the means to escape the death penalty.” The report consists of empirical research, interviews and questionnaires from states like California, Utah, Oklahoma, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Virginia.From DPIC
| NEWS: Former Ohio Death Row Inmate Exonerated--On Jan.23, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by the state of Ohio challenging the unconditional writ of habeas corpus and bar to the re-prosecution of Joe D'Ambrosio, who had been on death row. He has now been freed with all charges dismissed. (Bobby v. D'Ambrosio, No. 11-672). |
|
DPIC Releases Executions Decline,
On December 15, DPIC released "The Death Penalty in 2011: Year End Report," highlighting significant developments in capital punishment this year. New death sentences dropped to 78 in 2011, representing a dramatic decline from last year’s 112 and marking the first time since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976 that the country has produced fewer than 100 death sentences in a single year. Death sentences have declined about 75% since 1996, when 315 individuals were sentenced to death. Executions have also steadily decreased nationwide, with 43 in 2011 and 46 in 2010, representing a 56% decline since 1999, when there were 98. Texas had 13 executions in 2011 and 24 in 2009, representing a 46 percent drop over two years.
Furthermore, developments in a variety of states illustrated the growing discomfort that many Americans have with the death penalty. Illinois abolished the death penalty in 2011, the governor of Oregon declared a moratorium on all executions, and a national outcry was heard around the execution of Troy Davis in Georgia because of doubts about his guilt. Read the 2011 Year End Report. Read DPIC's Press Release. See also previous DPIC Reports. Listen to National Public Radio's coverage of DPIC's Report. See coverage of report on NBC Nightly News (Dec. 17, 2011). |
