Henry Weinstein has, "California's high court seeks death penalty fix," in the Los Angeles Times.
The California Supreme Court on Monday called for a constitutional amendment to ease the backlog in the state's death penalty system, which takes an average of 17 years to execute a condemned convict -- twice the national average.
The amendment would permit the state's high court, which has had exclusive oversight of capital appeals since California became a state in 1850, to transfer review of some death penalty cases to lower courts. Chief Justice Ronald M. George, who announced the proposal, said he wanted the Legislature to put the amendment on the November 2008 ballot.
The system's delays and ensuing backlogs are bad for the condemned inmates, prosecutors and the public interest "in finality and enforcement of the law," George said in a phone interview Monday.
Currently, the state's seven Supreme Court justices spend about 20% to 25% of their time and resources on capital cases, he said. The "ever-increasing backlog . . . threatens to overwhelm the Supreme Court's docket," George said.
The proposal follows a small but significant chorus of voices calling for change in what they describe as a "dysfunctional" system that renders capital punishment as little more than an illusion.
The state has the nation's largest death row population, with 667 inmates -- 652 men at San Quentin and 15 women at the Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla -- but only a few have exhausted their appeals, which can last decades.
California has executed 13 inmates since capital punishment was reinstated in 1978. In the meantime, more than 50 condemned prisoners have died of old age, suicide or prison violence.
In the San Francisco Chronicle, Matthew Yi has, "State Supreme Court's proposal would speed up Death Row appeals."
The justices' proposed constitutional amendment would give the court the right to refer a death penalty case to appeals courts. The Supreme Court would still have to affirm the decision in a written summary for it to be final, George said.
"And if the court of appeal didn't get it right, we can grant a review," George said. "I think it's a good balance."
The court would transfer 30 or so cases a year at most to the appellate courts, the chief justice said.
George said the justices will ask the state Legislature to approve the proposal - it requires a two-thirds vote - and place it on the November 2008 ballot.
A representative for an organization of defense attorneys criticized the proposal, saying it ignored the fact that many capital cases are slowed by Death Row inmates' inability to find lawyers.
"This proposal will do nothing to address the speed with which these cases will be resolved," said Lynne Coffin, chairwoman of the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice's death penalty committee. "The only way it will be resolved is to set aside more money for lawyers who defend these cases so that more of them would try these cases."
Some Bay Area experts praised the proposal as a badly needed solution to free up the Supreme Court to handle cases that may be more far reaching.
"This is one single step that is probably most effective for the court to take to start making sense out of California's criminal death penalty system," said Stephen Barnett, a professor at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law.
AP, via Google News, has, "Court Seeks Altered Death Penalty Appeal."
A constitutional amendment is required to change the current appeals process.
George said he hopes to find a legislator who will sponsor the measure, which would then require two-thirds of lawmakers to approve it. A majority of voters also would need to approve the change.
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, a defense lawyers' association, said "constitutional amendments are not the appropriate remedy for court congestion. This proposal fails to address the major problem: lack of qualified attorneys."
Death Penalty Focus, a San Francisco-based nonprofit agency that opposes capital punishment, hasn't yet taken an official position on the proposal, but a spokeswoman said she's "very concerned."
"Further increasing of the number of individuals reviewing these cases ... could cause increased disparities in the already unfair administration of the death penalty," Stefanie Faucher said.
All death sentences go through a similar appeals process.
First, the case undergoes an automatic direct appeal, which considers issues contained within the trial transcript like whether defendants were properly read their rights or whether a jury received proper instructions.
Next, outside issues like juror misconduct or inadequate legal representation are considered. After both appeals are complete, then the accused may begin the federal appeals process.
Comments