James Fisher, who spent 27 years on Oklahoma’s death row, was recently released to a re-entry program at the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI) in Montgomery, Alabama, after he accepted a plea agreement with prosecutors. Fisher, who is now working at EJI, had been sentenced to death twice, and in both instances, higher courts overturned his death sentence after finding that his defense attorneys provided him inadequate representation. His first lawyer, E. Melvin Porter, was unwilling or unable to reveal holes evident in the state's case. According to a federal appeals court, Porter exhibited "actual doubt and hostility" about his client's defense and failed to present a closing argument, even though the state's case was “hardly overwhelming.” Porter later admitted that, at the time, he considered homosexuals to be “among the worst people in the world” and considered Fisher a “very hostile client.” John Albert, Fisher’s second lawyer, later admitted that at the time of the trial, he was drinking heavily and abusing drugs, and once even physically threatened Fisher. Court records also show that Albert all but ignored defense material concerning the case and failed to sufficiently challenge the testimony of the state’s primary witness. Fisher instructed his new lawyer to seek a plea deal with prosecutors, avoiding a third trial. In an exchange for his freedom, he agreed to plead guilty to first-degree murder, to complete a comprehensive re-entry program in Alabama, and to never return to Oklahoma.
Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and Attorney General Richard Cordray recently urged prosecutors in seven criminal cases to allow DNA testing that could either prove innocence or confirm the defendant's guilt. The seven cases include one man currently on death row, Tyrone Noling, two inmates serving long sentences, three men who are no longer in prison but want to clear their names, and a man who died in prison in 2006. Gov. Strickland said, “I really think it's irrational not to take advantage of methods that could establish either guilt or innocence when those technologies are available to us. I can think of no good argument why anyone would be denied DNA testing if, in fact, there is a reasonable or relevant opportunity to bring clarity to whether or not someone is guilty of a crime." In all seven cases, prosecutors have resisted the DNA testing and judges have declined to grant it.
Cory Maples, an inmate on Alabama’s death row, may pay for a simple clerical error with his life. When copies of an Alabama court ruling in his case were sent to the New York law firm handling his appeals, both copies were returned unopened because the firm's attorneys representing Maples had left the firm. By the time the error was discovered, Maples’s time to appeal had expired. So far, the firm has failed to persuade a federal appeals court to waive the deadline for filing an appeal. Maples's new attorney is arguing that Maples should not be penalized for a mistake he did not commit. Prof. Deborah Rhode, an authority on indigent defense and legal ethics at Stanford, said, “Maples’s case is a textbook illustration of why the doctrine of imputing responsibility to the client for a lawyer’s mistake is so out of touch with reality.” Alabama is the only state that does not provide lawyers for all indigent death row inmates to challenge their convictions. Hence, defendants rely on volunteer attorneys, often from out of state, to fill the gap, and that contributed to the confusion.
An execution date of September 23 was recently set for Teresa Lewis, the only woman on Virginia’s death row. Although a number of other people were involved in the same crime, including the actual shooters of the two victims, Lewis was the only person sentenced to death. She pled guilty at trial. Since being sent to death row in 2002, Lewis has taken responsibility and apologized for her actions. She has had an exemplary record while in prison and does not appear to be a future danger if she remained there. Her current attorneys have pointed to her low IQ (measured as low as 72) and her vulnerability to being led by others as mitigating factors for the crime. She has a Dependent Personality Disorder and suffered from other mental disabilities at the time of the crime. If her execution goes through, Lewis would be the first woman to be executed in Virginia since 1912 and the first in the United States since 2005.
In a preliminary report, the Texas Forensic Science Commission recently found that fire investigators used flawed science in the case that led to the death sentence and execution of Cameron Todd Willingham. Willingham was executed in 2004, having been convicted of setting the fire that killed his three children. Willingham had always maintained his innocence and said the fire could have been an accident. The Commission acknowledged that new fire investigation standards were developed in 1992, the year Willingham was convicted, but said the standards were not adopted nationally until several years later. Hence, the Commission did not find professional negligence on the part of the investigators because they were relying on standards available at the time. Nevertheless, the jury convicted Willingham on the basis of the flawed evidence and Texas may have executed an innocent man. Patricia Cox, Willingham’s cousin, told the Commission, "Even though there may not have been any malice or intent by fire investigators about not being informed on current standards, that doesn't excuse the fact that, based on this misinformation, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed, and that can't be corrected."
Sharon Keller, the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, received a public warning from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct on July 16 for her conduct in barring access to the courts to a death row inmate who was about to be executed in 2007. The Commission said her actions constituted "willful or persistent conduct that is clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of her duties." When requested at home to allow a late-appeal filing by death row inmate Michael Richard, Judge Keller responded, "We close at 5." Richard was executed the same day, the last person to be executed in the country while the U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of lethal injections. Every other inmate scheduled for execution received a stay until the Supreme Court upheld the execution process in April 2008. The Commission described Keller's response as "willful or persistent conduct that casts public discredit on the judiciary."