Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania

Cost of Pennsylvania Death Penalty Estimated At $816 Million, Could Reach $1 Billion

Pennsylvania's taxpayers have paid an estimated $272 million per execution since the Commonwealth reinstated its death penalty in 1978, according to an investigation by The Reading Eagle. Using data from a 2008 study by the Urban Institute, the Eagle calculated that cost of sentencing 408 people to death was an estimated $816 million higher than the cost of life without parole. The estimate is conservative, the paper says, because it assumes only one capital trial for each defendant and it does not include the cost of cases in which the death penalty was sought but not imposed. The total cost may exceed $1 billion. An earlier investigation had estimated a cost of at least $350 million, based on the 185 inmates who were on death row as of 2014, but additional research into the cases that had already been overturned, or in which inmates died or were executed prior to 2014, revealed a total of 408 people who had been sentenced to death. Pennsylvania has carried out only three executions under its current death penalty statute. State Senator Stewart Greenleaf, a Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said, "We're scratching for every dollar that we can right now. To continue to spend that kind of money is hard to justify." The Eagle's investigation also uncovered geographic disparities in the application of the death penalty. 60% of all death sentences came from just four counties: Philadelphia, Allegheny, York, and Berks. Death sentencing rates also varied dramatically, with about a third of counties handing down zero death sentences, while three (Columbia, Cumberland, and Northumberland) had 5 or more death sentences per 100 murders. Somerset District Attorney Lisa Lazzari-Strasiser, who has filed one death penalty case in five years as District Attorney, said, "I think our system is broken. It doesn't do justice to any one of the stakeholders, in my opinion, not the taxpayers, the victims or the defendants. It doesn't work."

U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Pennsylvania Death Penalty Ruling Infected by Judicial Bias

On June 9, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Williams v. Pennsylvania that Terry Williams' (pictured) due process rights were violated when Pennsylvania's Chief Justice refused to recuse himself from the case. Ronald Castille served as Philadelphia District Attorney before being elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. As District Attorney, he personally approved the decision to pursue the death penalty against the 18-year-old Williams, and then, while running for state Supreme Court, touted his record of having "sent 45 people," including Williams, to death row. Nearly 30 years after Williams was sentenced to death, and within a week of his scheduled execution, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas heard evidence that prosecutors had presented false testimony from a witness and withheld evidence that it had given favorable treatment to that witness; suppressed evidence that the victim had sexually abused Williams and other boys; and misrepresented to the jury that the victim had been simply a "kind man" who had offered Williams a ride home. After the court overturned Williams' death sentence, Philadelphia prosecutors appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, where Castille was serving as Chief Justice. Williams' attorneys filed a motion seeking Castille's recusal, but he denied the motion, refused to refer the question to the full court, and voted with the majority of the court to reverse the lower court ruling and reinstate Williams' death sentence. Castille also authored a concurring opinion saying the lower court had stayed Williams' death sentence "for no valid reason," attacking the judge for having “lost sight of [her] role as a neutral judicial officer,” and denouncing Williams' counsel for having an “obstructionist anti-death penalty agenda” and turning postconviction proceedings “into a circus where [they] are the ringmasters, with their parrots and puppets as a sideshow.” The U.S. Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, reversed, saying "[a] constitutionally intolerable probability of bias exists when the same person serves as both accuser and adjudicator in a case." Here, the Court ruled, "Chief Justice Castille’s significant, personal involvement in a critical decision in Williams’s case gave rise to an unacceptable risk of actual bias." It further determined that Castille's participation in the case "affected the ... whole adjudicatory framework" of the appeal, and ordered the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to reconsider the appeal. “Today, Terry Williams comes one step closer to the new, fair sentencing hearing he deserves,” said Shawn Nolan, an attorney for Williams, “We’re optimistic that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will give this case careful consideration and recognize the injustice of Terry’s death sentence.”

Former State Chief Justices: Pennsylvania Justice Should Not Have Approved Death as D.A., Then Reviewed Case on Appeal

In a recent Washington Times op-ed, two former state supreme court chief justices argue that a state supreme court justice who, as district attorney, had authorized the capital prosecution of a defendant, should not have later participated as a judge in deciding an appeal in that case. Gerald Kogan (pictured, l.), former chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court, and Michael Wolff (pictured, r.), former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri, joined a number of other former judges who had been prosecutors and former appellate court jurists in filing briefs supporting the position of Philadelphia death-row prisoner Terry Williams in the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case, Williams v. Pennsylvania. The case, which the Court will hear on February 29, concerns the participation of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Castille in the prosecution's appeal of a trial court ruling that had overturned Williams' death sentence because of prosecutorial misconduct. The appeals court reversed the trial court and reinstated Williams' death sentence. Kogan and Wolff say that Castille should have recused himself from hearing the appeal. "We, along with many other former judges, have urged the Supreme Court to find that Chief Justice Castille’s prior relationship to the case created an impermissible risk of bias," they say. "As the former district attorney, Chief Justice Castille personally, in a handwritten note, authorized seeking the death penalty for Mr. Williams. Moreover, he used the Williams death verdict to support his campaign for the Supreme Court seat. And finally, considering the case required Chief Justice Castille to evaluate a court’s finding of misconduct against the office over which he formerly presided."

EDITORIALS: Newspapers Stress Findings from DPIC's 2015 Year End Report

Several newspapers across the country featured themes from DPIC's 2015 Year End Report in editorials and opinion pieces at the end of December:

"Once broadly accepted, capital punishment is increasingly a fringe practice. A handful of states conduct nearly all executions. Four — Texas, Missouri, Georgia and Florida — carried out 93 percent of them in 2015. Sixty-three percent of new death sentences came from a mere 2 percent of U.S. counties, a group with a history of disproportionately using the death penalty.Bad policy encourages this sort of excess: Three states — Alabama, Delaware and Florida — do not require juries to be unanimous when recommending a death sentence. A quarter of new sentences came from split juries in these states."

"Not only did executions drop in 2015, but the number of people sentenced to death also hit an historic low, the center said. That could be due to a growing skepticism by jurors of a system susceptible to manipulation through coerced testimony or other misconduct...— or there could be some other reason for a decline in convictions on capital punishment charges...What is clear is that there's no correcting an execution if later evidence shows the prosecution was wrong...Abolition is the direction of the future, and the U.S. should join."

"[T]he fact that new death sentences were at an all-time low in Texas this year is reason to applaud...Texas’ declines mirror numbers across the nation. According to the Death Penalty Information Center’s year-end report, death sentences dropped 33 percent from 2014, with 49 people being sentenced to death this year. Just six states carried out executions, the fewest since 1998...Confidence in the system’s integrity is waning. It should only follow that support for the death penalty follows suit."
 
 
"In 2015, in fact, otherwise proudly liberal California led the nation in death sentences with 14, even as the national number dropped to 49, the fewest since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Of California’s death sentences, eight were in Riverside County (including five of the eight Latinos sentenced to death nationwide), plus three in Los Angeles and one in Orange...If we’re going to have the death penalty, shouldn’t it be at least somewhat consistent across the state?"

"As Florida becomes more isolated in its administration of the death penalty, the state is getting deserved scrutiny for problems with the practice. A year-end report from the Washington, D.C.-based Death Penalty Information Center found just three states — Alabama, California and Florida — accounted for more than half of the nation’s new death sentences in 2015. More than a quarter of this year’s death sentences were imposed by Florida and Alabama after non-unanimous jury recommendations of death — a practice allowed in just those two states and Delaware. ...As Florida officials have pushed to speed up the pace of executions, the Death Penalty Information Center found the rest of the country is heading in the opposite direction. A dozen states haven’t executed anyone in at least nine years, while 18 states and the District of Columbia have outlawed the death penalty altogether. ... As most other states move away from the death penalty, it is long past time for Florida to follow their lead."

"A Reading Eagle investigation in October found nearly one in five Pennsylvania inmates sentenced to death the past decade were represented by attorneys disciplined for professional misconduct at some point in their careers. And the majority of these disciplined attorneys had been found by Pennsylvania courts to be ineffective in at least one capital case. More than 150 inmates sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated since 1973, according to data compiled by the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington. Sooner or later an innocent person will be executed, if it hasn't happened already...It is time to end the death penalty in Pennsylvania." (This editorial announced the end of the Eagle's prior position supporting the death penalty under limited circumstances.)

NEW VOICES: Why Prosecutors in Texas, Pennsylvania Are Seeking Death Penalty Less Often

Prosecutors across the country are seeking the death penalty less frequently and in recent interviews two district attorneys, one from Texas and one from Pennsylvania, have given some of their reasons why. Randall County, Texas District Attorney James Farren (pictured) told KFDA-TV in Amarillo that his experience handling one particularly lengthy and costly capital case has changed how he will make decisions in future cases that are eligible for the death penalty. He said that his office has spent, "conservatively...at least $400,000" on the prosecution of Brittany Holberg, who has been on death row since 1998. Farren said the costs are too high for taxpayers and "I do not want to subject them to this kind of thing any longer." While he said he still supports the death penalty, Farren predicted that, in the near future, the U.S. Supreme Court "likely will decide society has evolved to the point that it’s no longer appropriate." In an interview with the Reading EagleJohn T. Adams, District Attorney of Berks County, Pennsylvania, says that he rarely seeks the death penalty and is "just as happy with a life sentence as I am a death sentence." If defendantants are sentenced to life without parole, Adams says, "[t]hey will not be a threat to our community ever again. And frankly, community safety is the utmost of my concerns." Adams adds, "I think you will find throughout Pennsylvania that we are seeking [the death penalty] less and less, and I think that's good."

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Unanimously Upholds Governor's Moratorium on Executions

In a unanimous decision issued December 21, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld Gov. Tom Wolf's (pictured) imposition of a moratorium on executions while he awaits the results of a legislative commission's report on Pennsylvania's death penalty. On February 13, 2015, Wolf issued a temporary reprieve to Terrance Williams and announced that he would put all executions on hold. At that time, he said that Pennsylvania's "capital punishment system has significant and widely recognized defects" and was "ineffective, unjust, and expensive." Prosecutors challenged the governor's authority to issue reprieves of indefinite duration that were based upon systemic concerns. The Court disagreed. Writing for the Court, Justice Max Baer said, "at the time the reprieve power was adopted in the 1790 Constitution, the Governor's authority to issue a reprieve was not understood as being limited to granting reprieves with a specific end date or for a purpose relating only to the prisoner's unique circumstances, but rather encompassed any temporary postponement of sentence." Williams' case is also pending before the U.S. Supreme Court on a separate issue - whether former Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille should have recused himself from hearing the appeal of a lower court decision reversing Williams' death sentence because of prosecutorial misconduct by the Philadelphia District Attorney's office while Castille was District Attorney. Castille had personally authorized Williams' prosecution in his role as D.A. and had campaigned for judge based upon his record of having sent more than 40 defendants to death row. The state appeals court overturned the trial court's decision and reinstated Williams' death sentence. Two judicial groups and six legal organizations, including the American Bar Association and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, recently filed amicus briefs supporting Williams' position that Castille should have recused himself and that his participation tainted the court's decision to return Williams to death row.

Sexually Abused Teen Who Killed His Abuser Faces Execution Despite Inadequate Defense, Judge's Conflict of Interest

Terry Williams was barely 18 when he killed Amos Norwood, a man who had been sexually abusing him since Williams was 13. A recent article in Mother Jones discusses how the Philadelphia District Attorney's office - which championed the cause of sexual abuse victims during landmark prosecutions of several clergy abuse cases - is aggressively seeking to execute Williams, employing the very stereotypes about abuse victims it publicly rejected in the clergy trials. At the time of those trials, D.A. Seth Williams said "[a]s we have learned, it is extremely difficult for sexual abuse victims to admit that the assault happened, and then to actually report the abuse to authorities can be even harder for them." But in Terry Williams' case, the office has argued both that his silence discredits his claim of having been repeatedly sexually abused and that the killing was a product of  "gay-prostitute rage." Williams never met his court-appointed lawyer until the day before his trial and, not trusting the lawyer, did not reveal his history of sexual abuse. Philadelphia prosecutors knew that WIlliams had been sexually abused before and had evidence that Norwood had made sexual advances toward other young boys. Nevertheless, prosecutors removed references to Norwood's abusive proclivities from several witness statements before providing sanitized versions of those statements to Williams' defense. In a separate case, the same prosecutor, Andrea Foulkes, had tried Williams for the murder of Herbert Hamilton, who had paid Williams for sex when Williams was a teenager. In that trial, the jury acquitted Williams, who was 17 at the time of that killing, of first-degree murder, after hearing evidence of Hamilton's relationship with Williams and convicted him of the lesser charge of third-degree murder. Judge Teresa Sarmina wrote, "The third degree verdict in the Hamilton case, colored Ms. Foulkes' decisions when she prosecuted [Williams] for the murder of Amos Norwood." Despite her awareness of Norwood's sexual proclivities, Foulkes told the jury Williams had killed him "for no other reason but that a kind man offered him a ride home." Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Castille - the former Philadelphia D.A. - refused to recuse himself from WIlliams' appeal, even though Castille had personally authorized Williams' prosecution and, during his judicial election campaign, had trumpeted his record of sending 45 people to death row. Norwood's widow joined more than 350,000 people in supporting Williams' bid for clemency, but the pardons board's 3-2 recommendation for clemency fell short of the state's unanimity requirement. Terry Williams faced an execution date of March 4, 2015, but was granted a reprieve when Gov. Tom Wolf announced a moratorium on the death penalty in February. In October 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Williams' challenge to Castille's participation in his appeal.

Pennsylvania Death-Row Prisoners Disproportionately Represented at Trial by Attorneys with Disciplinary Problems

15.1% of capital defendants sentenced to death in Pennsylvania since 1980 were represented at trial by a lawyer who has been disciplined for professional misconduct, and that has risen to 18.2% in the past decade, according to an investigative report by The Reading Eagle. These rates of discipline were between 5 and 6 times higher than the 3% disciplinary rate for Pennsylvania lawyers as a whole over the past 30 years. The disciplinary issues have disproportionately affected minority defendants: 83% of the death-row prisoners who had been represented by lawyers with disciplinary violations were black or Latino. The Eagle's review of more than 300 capital cases also revealed that two thirds of the disciplined lawyers had been found to have provided ineffective representation in at least one case in which their clients had been sentenced to death. Ineffectiveness accounts for nearly 60% of capital case reversals in Pennsylvania and is the most common reason a conviction or death sentence is overturned. In 2004, Pennsylvania created Rule 801, which established minimum experience requirements for attorneys in capital cases. However, the rule contains no quality controls, does not mandate any performance evaluations, and does not set any baseline for attorney compensation. Marc Bookman, director of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation, said low pay for appointed capital attorneys is part of the problem. "Only the worst lawyers would consider taking these cases on a regular basis because you can't make a living doing it," he said. Pennsylvania is not alone in its high rates of misconduct for lawyers appointed to capital trials. In Texas, one in four death row inmates had been represented by attorneys who were disciplined for misconduct, and in Washington, the same was true of one in five. 

Pages