Louisiana

Louisiana

Louisiana Executions on Hold Until State Addresses Lethal Injection Issues

A federal judge in Louisiana has delayed five executions until at least July 2016 as state officials struggle to determine how to conduct executions using lethal injection. Christopher Sepulvado, a death row inmate whose execution has been rescheduled several times over the last two years, is challenging the constitutionality of Louisiana's execution method. The Department of Corrections requested that a hearing related to Sepulvado's challenge be put on hold because, "it would be a waste of resources and time to litigate this matter at present," because of ongoing developments relating to the availability of lethal injection drugs. Louisiana does not currently have an execution protocol. Its last protocol, however, was the same as that used in Arizona's botched execution of Joseph Wood: a combination of hydromorphone and midazolam. The state allegedly lied to a hospital in order to obtain one of the drugs in 2014, telling a pharmacist that the drug was needed for "a medical patient," not an execution. The Department of Corrections' last known supply of the execution drugs has now expired.

Death Row Exoneree Glenn Ford Dies One Year After Release

Glenn Ford, who was exonerated last year after spending almost 30 years on Louisiana's death row, died of lung cancer on June 29 at the age of 65. At the time of his release, Ford was the nation's longest-serving death row exoneree. Just hours after his death, Ford's case was cited in the dissenting opinion of Justice Breyer in Glossip v. Gross, as providing “striking” evidence “that the death penalty has been wrongly imposed.” Justice Breyer mentioned innocence, prosecutorial wrongdoing, the length of time inmates spend on death row, and the unreliability of capital convictions among the reasons why he now “believe[s] it highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment.” In 1984, Ford was convicted of murder on the testimony of a witness who later said police had helped her make up her story. Ford's attorney had never tried a case before a jury. After Ford's exoneration, the lead prosecutor on his case, A.M. "Marty" Stroud III, issued a public apology. He expressed his belief in Ford's complete innocence, saying, "There was no technicality here. Crafty lawyering did not secure the release of a criminal...Pursuant to the review and investigation of cold homicide cases, investigators uncovered evidence that exonerated Mr. Ford. Indeed, this evidence was so strong that had it been disclosed during of the investigation there would not have been sufficient evidence to even arrest Mr. Ford!" Stroud urged the state to grant Ford compensation for his wrongful conviction, but no compensation was granted before Ford's death.  

Gary Clements, Director of the Capital Post-Conviction Project of Louisiana, tells DPIC that "At 2:11 [Monday] morning, Glenn slipped away very quietly and peacefully. He was held and surrounded by people who cared about him, and was listening to a song he loved."

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Intellectually Disabled Louisiana Defendant

CORRECTION:  On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Brumfield v. Cain, a Louisiana death penalty case dealing with intellectual disability. The Court held that the federal district court was entitled to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Kevan Brumfield has intellectual disability and is therefore ineligible for execution. It reversed a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that would have deferred to a Lousiana state court decision permitting Brumfield to be executed without a hearing on his claim of intellectual disability. After an extensive evidentiary hearing, the district court held that Brumfield was intellectually disabled.  By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana had unreasonably determined the facts when it decided that Brumfield had not presented sufficient evidence of intellectual and adaptive impairments to warrant an evidentiary hearing in state court. Writing for the majority, Justice Sotomayor said, "After Atkins was decided, petitioner, a Louisiana death-row inmate, requested an opportunity to prove he was intellectually disabled in state court. Without affording him an evidentiary hearing or granting him time or funding to secure expert evidence, the state court rejected petitioner’s claim. That decision, we hold, was 'based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.' Petitioner was therefore entitled to have his Atkins claim considered on the merits in federal court." The case returns to the Fifth Circuit for consideration of whether the district court's findings are supported by the record.

EDITORIALS: New York Times Sees "Alarming" Link Between Official Misconduct and Death Penalty Mistakes

In an editorial on April 13, the New York Times described the death penalty as "cruel, immoral, and ineffective at reducing crime" and called it "so riddled with error that no civilized nation should tolerate its use."  The Times described how prosecutorial misconduct and an "all-too-common mind-set to win at all costs" played a substantial role in the convictions of many of the 152 innocent men and women who have been exonerated after beingly wrongly sent to death row and had contributed to the execution of at least two death-row inmates who almost certainly were innocent. "Innocent people get convicted for many reasons, including bad lawyering, mistaken identifications and false confessions made under duress," the editorial said. "But as advances in DNA analysis have accelerated the pace of exonerations, it has also become clear that prosecutorial misconduct is at the heart of an alarming number of these cases." The Times noted that "In the past year alone, nine people who had been sentenced to death were released — and in all but one case, prosecutors’ wrongdoing played a key role."  Read full editorial below.

1 County, 2 Prosecutors Responsible for 3/4 of Recent Louisiana Death Sentences, Amid Charges of Prosecutorial Misconduct

Of the 12 death sentences handed down in Louisiana in the last 5 years, 8 have come from Caddo Parish. Caddo is also among the 2% of U.S. counties responsible for 56% of people on death row. With a population of just 257,000, Caddo Parish has sent 16 people to death row, the second highest of any parish in Louisiana. Two prosecutors, one of whom is under investigation for prosecutorial misconduct, are responsible for 6 of the recent death sentences. Hugo Holland, who handled two cases that resulted in death sentences in the last five years, is being investigated by the Disciplinary Board of the state's bar association for failing to turn over evidence favorable to a defendant being tried for the murder of a prison guard. That defendant's death sentence was overturned in 2014. Prosecutor Dale Cox, who obtained four of Caddo's recent death sentences, has said he believes death row inmates spend too long awaiting execution, but waited 10 months to sign off on the release of Glenn Ford after evidence of Ford's innocence was uncovered. Ford was convicted in Caddo Parish and spent 30 years on death row before his exoneration. (Pictured: Caddo County Courthouse, 2010.)

Supreme Court Grants Review in Three Kansas Cases; Hears Case on Intellectual Disability

On Monday, March 30, the U.S. Supreme Court granted review of three Kansas death penalty cases and heard oral argument in a Louisiana case that presented questions on the role of the federal courts in determining whether a state prisoner who faces the death penalty has intellectual disability. In the cases of Kansas v. Reginald Carr, Kansas v. Jonathan Carr, and Kansas v. Sidney Gleason, the Court granted review of the Kansas Supreme Court's decisions overturning the defendants' death sentences because their sentencing juries were not told that, unlike proof of other facts in the case, the defendant did not have to prove mitigating circumstances (reasons for life) beyond a reasonable doubt. It also granted review in the Carr cases of the state court's decision that the brothers should not have been tried together in the penalty phase of their capital trial because some of their mitigating evidence was mutually antagonistic and the jury should not have considered this evidence against the other brother. In Brumfield v. Cain, the Court heard argument in the case of a Louisiana man, Kevan Brumfield, sentenced to death before the Supreme Court ruling in Atkins v. Virginia banned the execution of defendants with mental retardation (now intellectual disability). (For more on the Brumfield case, click here.)  The Supreme Court will determine whether the federal courts must defer to a decision of the state courts that rejected his claim of intellectual disability based solely upon the evidence presented at his trial or whether to credit the federal district court's finding after a seven-day evidentiary hearing that Mr. Brumfield is intellectually disabled and may not be executed.

NEW VOICES: Lead Prosecutor Apologizes to Death Row Exoneree, Urges State to Offer Compensation

UPDATE: After Louisiana denied compensation to Mr. Ford — who is in hospice care, dying from Stage 4 cancer — Stroud gave an interview to the Huffington Post in which he says "death penalty prosecutions are a badge of showing how out-of-touch we are with other civilized societies. . . . We can’t trust the government to fix potholes. Why should we believe they can design a death penalty system that's fair?" PREVIOUSLY: In a letter to the Shreveport (Louisiana) Times, attorney A.M. "Marty" Stroud III (pictured), the lead prosecutor in the 1984 trial that sent Glenn Ford to death row until he was exonerated in 2014, offered his apologies to Ford, "for all the misery I have caused him and his family." Stroud voiced his full belief in Ford's innocence, saying "There was no technicality here. Crafty lawyering did not secure the release of a criminal...Pursuant to the review and investigation of cold homicide cases, investigators uncovered evidence that exonerated Mr. Ford. Indeed, this evidence was so strong that had it been disclosed during of the investigation there would not have been sufficient evidence to even arrest Mr. Ford!" Stroud takes responsibility for being "too passive" in prosecuting the case. "I did not hide evidence, I simply did not seriously consider that sufficient information may have been out there that could have led to a different conclusion," he said. "I was arrogant, judgmental, narcissistic and very full of myself. I was not as interested in justice as I was in winning." Now he is calling for compensation for Ford -- who is dying of stage 4 cancer that was untreated while he was in prison -- and a reconsideration of the death penalty. "Glenn Ford deserves every penny owed to him under the compensation statute. This case is another example of the arbitrariness of the death penalty.... No one should be given the ability to impose a sentence of death in any criminal proceeding. We are simply incapable of devising a system that can fairly and impartially impose a sentence of death because we are all fallible human beings."

The Angolite Features Louisiana's Death Row Exonerees

An article in the latest edition of The Angolite, a magazine published by prisoners at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, tells the stories of the ten men who have been exonerated from death row in that state. The piece prominently features Glenn Ford, the state's most recent inmate to be freed. Ford spent 30 years on death row before being released in 2014. Among the other cases described is that of John Thompson, who was freed after it was revealed that prosecutors intentionally withheld evidence from his attorneys. A jury awarded Thompson $14 million in damages, but the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the decision, saying the prosecutor's office could not be held accountable for not training their staff based on this single violation of the law. After describing all ten cases in which the wrongfully convicted men spent a total of 120 years on death row, the article concludes, "These are symptoms of a criminal justice system in dire need of repair....These are dangers of the ultimate punishment that can never be taken back, even if down the road innocence is proven." 

Pages