The StandDown Texas Project

Pocono Record Editorial

"End futility of death penalty system," is the editorial published by the Pocono Record in Pennsylvania.

If there’s one thing for which Pennsylvanians can thank confessed double murderer William Parrish, it’s pointing out the mirage of the state’s capital punishment law.

“Mirage” is no mere opinion. It reflects reality. Pennsylvania has imposed the death penalty 412 times since 1978, when capital punishment was reinstated, but only three people have been executed — and they essentially committed legal suicide, by declining to appeal. The last prisoner executed against his will was put to death in 1962, more than 50 years ago.

And:

A 2011 Morning Call article reported that the death penalty costs an additional $2.27 million every year, even though, as Parrish’s recent stay shows, executions do not occur.

Death penalty advocates and death penalty opponents alike should agree that the system is broken. For all intents and purposes, it’s mere smoke and mirrors. All the death penalty is doing is bleeding Pennsylvania taxpayers.

Earlier coverage from Pennsylvania begins at the link.

From South Dakota

"'Suicide' common on South Dakota's death row," John Hult's report in today's Sioux Falls Argus Leader.

This morning, we learned that death row inmate James McVay was found dead in his cell.

All signs point to suicide, as Mr. McVay was hanging from a bed sheet.

That makes him the second death row inmate to commit suicide in his cell – the first was Robert Leroy Anderson in 2003 - but the reality is that each of the death row inmates who've died in South Dakota during the modern era accepted death before they had to.

About 10 percent of executed inmates in the U.S. fall into the category of a "volunteer," or a person who ends their appeals early.

In South Dakota, the figure is 100 percent.

And:

McVay's death leaves three men on death row: Page's co-defendant Briley Piper, Robert's co-defendant Rodney Berget and Charles Rhines, now the longest-serving death row inmate.

Rhines decried the conditions on South Dakota's death row – which isn't a wing of the penitentiary, but simply a designation for some of the men in administrative segregation - in a series of letters to the Argus Leader in 2013.

Earlier coverage from South Dakota begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

What the Botched Executions Mean to Other States

The Sunday South Bend Tribune reported, "What do recent botched executions mean for death penalty?" by Bob Blake.  It's a lengthy article examining Indiana's death penalty.

In Indiana, there are currently 13 inmates — all men — on death row at Indiana State Prison in Michigan City, according to Doug Garrison, a spokesman for the Indiana Department of Correction. One woman also faces a death sentence in Indiana, however, she is currently serving a life sentence in Ohio, Garrison said.

Since 1977, 97 people have been sentenced to death in Indiana with 20 executions, according to information from the Indiana Public Defender Council. Matthew Eric Wrinkles, 49, was the last Hoosier to face execution. He was executed in December 2009 for a 1994 triple murder near Evansville.

The next inmate likely to face execution in the state is Michael Dean Overstreet, according to Garrison. Overstreet was convicted of the September 1997 rape and murder of a college student in Johnson County. An attorney for  Overstreet is challenging his competency to face execution, arguing he doesn’t understand what the state intends to do to him. The argument is set to be heard beginning Tuesday in South Bend.

"Could Pennsylvania botch an execution?" is by Laurie Mason Schroeder in today's Allentown Morning Call.

Northampton mass murderer Michael Ballard has a death wish. Are Pennsylvania prison executioners ready to grant it?

In the wake of three highly publicized botched executions this year in other parts of the country, as well as a shortage of the drugs used to kill those on death row, it's a question worth asking.

State prison officials say they're ready to give Ballard, or any other condemned prisoner, his final sentence. But a lack of transparency, especially about the drugs used in lethal injections, has raised concerns.

"Pennsylvania could be facing some of the same questions that these other states are now faced with," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit group that maintains statistics on capital punishment.

"No state wants to have to defend a two-hour, botched spectacle."

Related posts are in the botch category index.  Earlier coverage Of Michael Ballard's case in Pennsylvania begins at the link.

News Coverage of Pennsylvania Hearing

The Allentown Morning Call posts, "Judge orders further psychiatric evaluation of Michael Ballard," by Riley Yates and Pamela Lehman, following this morning's hearing in Pennsylvania.

Mass murderer Michael Eric Ballard's hearing Friday rejecting any appeals of his death sentence began with Ballard objecting to an evaluation by a psychiatrist.

Ballard was brought before Northampton County Judge Emil Giordano in a wheelchair, cuffed, with a large legal folder in his lap.

Giordano said he wanted a psychiatrist to again evaluate Ballard to make sure he was competent to waive any appeals, but Ballard objected. Ballard said during his trial, he had been evaluated by a number of mental health experts and said another evaluation was not necessary.

And:

Despite a series of questions, Giordano said he wanted Ballard again evaluated to determine his competency. The judge appointed Dr. Frank Dattilio, a forensic psychologist from Salisbury, to evaluate Ballard's competency, despite his objections.

Giordano also appointed Ballard's trial attorneys, Michael Corriere and James Connell, to continue to represent him, and issued an order barring the Federal Community Defender Office in Philadelphia and other anti-death penalty lawyers from entering their appearances without permission of the court.

Earlier coverage of the Pennsylvania case begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

A Potential Volunteer in Pennsylvania

The Allentown Morning Call reports, "Will Michael Ballard go ahead with wish to be executed?" by Riley Yates.

To Northampton County's top prosecutor, mass murderer Michael Eric Ballard is a "mad dog" and a "poster boy" for the death penalty.

To Ballard, District Attorney John Morganelli is a "little Napoleon" who has used his crime to score political points.

Yet on Friday in a county courtroom in Easton, Morganelli and the killer he sent to death row could sit as unlikely allies.

That's because they now share a common goal: the execution of Ballard, who has said he does not want any further appeals of his sentence for massacring four people in a Northampton home in 2010.

That could produce strange bedfellows as Morganelli asks Ballard to repeat in court what he has already told his lawyers, the U.S. Supreme Court and a Morning Call reporter — that he is willing to be put to death and does not want any more legal efforts on his behalf.

Friday's hearing is an extraordinary one, considering that in the modern era of the death penalty Pennsylvania has only executed inmates when they volunteered for it by abandoning their appeals.

Earlier coverage of the case begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.  It's the term used for death row inmates who waive their appeals.  Earlier coverage from Pennsylvania begins at the link.

From Nevada

The Las Vegas Sun features a Q&A with Assistant Federal Public Defender Michael Pescetta, in, "A look inside Nevada’s death row with a federal defense attorney."  It's by Ana Ley.

Today, his office represents more than half of the 83 men sitting on death row.

Capital punishment has faced scrutiny nationwide in recent months after drug experimentation apparently led to a series of botched executions in three states. The topic should gain even more traction in the Silver State as officials scramble to assemble a mandated legislative audit of the state death penalty by Jan. 31, 2015.

Pescetta chatted with the Sun this week about the death penalty. His answers have been edited for brevity and clarity.

Earlier coverage from Nevada begins at the link.

Florida Supreme Court Orders Attorney to Remain on Case

The Florida Supreme Court ruling in Robertson v. Florida is available in Adobe .pdf format.

The Tallahassee Democrat reports, "State Supreme Court orders death-row lawyer to stay on case," by Dara Kam.

A sharply divided Florida Supreme Court on Thursday ordered a Death Row inmate’s lawyer to remain on the case even though convicted murderer James Robertson wants to be executed.

Robertson’s public defender, Steven Bolotin, asked to be removed from the case earlier this year, arguing that Florida Bar rules require him to represent his client’s wishes. Robertson, who has spent more than three decades in prison, was sentenced to death in 2012 for killing his cellmate four years earlier.

“If the attorney is required to seek reversal of his client’s death sentence when the client adamantly desires affirmance of the death sentence it is a legal fiction, at best, to say that the attorney is acting ‘on (the client’s) behalf’ ... or providing advocacy of the client’s interests,” Bolotin wrote in a January motion.

But, in a 4-3 ruling echoing previous decisions, the Supreme Court majority ordered Bolotin to continue to represent Robertson in the direct-appeal process required by Florida law in capital cases.

"Client’s wish for death penalty doesn’t justify defense lawyer’s withdrawal, Fla. supreme court says," is the ABA Journal post by Debra Cassens Weiss.

Robertson can seek leave to file a supplemental brief explaining his own positions and interests, the court said.

In a concurrence, Justice Barbara Parienti argued that ABA standards consider a lawyer’s acquiescence in a client’s desire to be executed to be ineffective assistance. “In other words,” she wrote, “not only does the client have no right to commit state-assisted suicide, but it is actually ineffective—and therefore unethical—conduct for an attorney to accede to this request.” Her opinion was joined by two other justices.

The dissenters argued that the majority infringes on Robertson’s right to decide whether to appeal his death sentence and his right to a lawyer who will abide by his decision regarding the objectives of representation.

Earlier, unrelated, coverage from Florida begins at the link.

Supreme Court Rejects Pennsylvania Appeal and Asks for Lawyer Response

"Checking up on a capital case," is Lyle Denniston's post at SCOTUSblog.

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a Philadelphia lawyer to answer his client’s protest that an appeal challenging his death sentence should not have been filed in the Court. In a brief order, the Court denied the petition (Ballard v. Pennsylvania) but simultaneously called for a response from the attorney who filed it.

The petition was filed on February 7 by Marc Bookman, an attorney with the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation in Philadelphia.  Prosecutors urged the Supreme Court not to grant review.

In a letter dated June 2 and filed at the Court on June 10, the client, Michael E. Ballard, said he had learned from the media that “an appeal has been filed on my behalf contesting my death sentence.  I never authorized anyone to file anything on my behalf.  I am not appealing this sentence any further than it has been.”

Today's Allentown Morning Call reports, "U.S. Supreme Court denies Ballard appeal; lawyer has some explaining to do," by Riley Yates.

The U.S. Supreme Court wants an attorney who filed an appeal on mass murderer Michael Eric Ballard's behalf to explain why he apparently did so without his client's knowledge.

In a two-sentence order Monday, the justices dismissed a petition that sought to challenge the death sentence Ballard received for massacring four people in a Northampton home in 2010. But in a rare move, the court also ordered Philadelphia lawyer Marc Bookman to address Ballard's allegation that the appeal was made against his wishes, with Bookman given 40 days to do so.

Inmates who waive their appeals are referred to as volunteers.

Second Volunteer in Oregon Seeks Execution

The Oregonian reports, "Oregon death-row prisoner joins Gary Haugen in seeking execution," by Helen Jung.  Here's an extended excerpt from the beginning:

A second death-row prisoner is challenging Oregon to carry out the death penalty, saying he agrees with co-defendant and fellow inmate Gary Haugen that the legal system is broken and pursuing appeals is pointless.

Jason Van Brumwell, who was sent to death row in 2007 with Haugen after the two were convicted of a prison killing, has written the Oregon Supreme Court that he wants to waive his appeals and is prepared to be executed, he said in a phone interview with The Oregonian.

“It’s about this whole (expletive) system we’ve got here,” Brumwell said, adding that he watched Haugen’s legal battles with his own attorneys. “I told myself if it ever got to this point where everything breaks down,” that he would withdraw and allow his death sentence to be carried out. “I owe it to myself to be true to myself.”

The development could hand Gov. John Kitzhaber his second death-row dilemma in his current term. Haugen in 2011 waived his appeals and was to be executed in December of that year. But two weeks before the planned execution date, Kitzhaber, who has said he is morally opposed to capital punishment, issued a reprieve for Haugen. He also said he would not allow executions to proceed while he is governor.

The move triggered both praise and criticism for the governor, who allowed two executions to proceed in his first term. Haugen sued, arguing the governor was overstepping his authority. The Oregon Supreme Court sided with the governor, and Haugen is awaiting word whether the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the case.

"2nd Oregon death row inmate wants execution; Gov. Kitzhaber blocking death penalty," is AP coverage, via the Daily Journal.

A second Oregon death row inmate is challenging the state to carry out its death penalty.

Jason Van Brumwell agrees with fellow inmate Gary Haugen that pursuing appeals is pointless and he should be executed.

The 38-year-old Brumwell was sent to death row in 2007 with Haugen after the two were convicted of a prison killing.

And:

There are 34 men and one woman on Oregon's death row. No inmate has been given a lethal injection since 1997.

"Deadly Serious: The effort to repeal capital punishment in Washington continues to face an ideological divide," is by Eli Francovich at the Inlander.

The March hearing in front of the Washington state House Judiciary Committee was all official-sounding sentences and professional courtesies. The formality glossed over the raw emotion of this discussion of death and justice and capital punishment. More than 21 representatives — including one Republican — sponsored House Bill 1504 to repeal Washington's death penalty. Former GOP Gov. Dan Evans prepared a written statement in support of repeal and about 20 citizens attended, giving their testimony in support of repeal. No one testified against.

Although pro-repeal activists paint the issue as clear-cut — a practical economic decision — the issue remains in many ways an ideological one. As last year's hearing highlighted, plenty of vocal and organized support exists for repealing the death penalty. By contrast, there's little or no organized pro-death penalty support. But that isn't to say there is no resistance.

"You get passive dismissal from the pro folks," says Dick Morgan, retired director of Washington's Division of Prisons and a board member of the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. "A lot of times you will get, 'Oh that's what the people want,' but we don't really know, because the majority of the people haven't voted on it."

That is the crux, and hope, of the repeal argument. Washingtonians voted to reinstate the death penalty in 1981, and since then there have been no other votes. The same bill from last year is back on the agenda for the coming legislative session and has backers in all four caucuses.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

Federal Death Penalty Roundup

There is news involving two federal death penalty cases.

AP reports, "Condemned federal inmate says he won't seek clemency, wants to set execution date."  It's by Brett Barrouquere, via the Daily Journal.

A federal inmate on death row for killing a South Carolina woman after escaping from a Kentucky jail wants to bypass any attempt to save his own life and accept an execution date once it is set.

Chadrick Evan Fulks, 36, said he wants to free his lawyers to work for inmates "that do have a chance" of winning a reprieve or an appeal and not spend time and energy on him.

"I feel like I'm just a case # to them and they now have more important cases to work on now that I don't have a chance," Fulks wrote in an email to The Associated Press. "So, why continue on?"

And:

Attempts to reach Amy Donnella, the federal public defender handling Fulks' case, were unsuccessful over several weeks. Fulks appeals have each been turned away in the courts, with the U.S. Supreme Court rejecting a last bid from him Dec. 4.

Federal executions are on hold while the Justice Department writes new regulations for carrying out lethal injections in response to lawsuits brought by several inmates. The last federal execution took place in 2003, when Louis Jones was put to death by lethal injection for a kidnapping resulting in a death.

Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman Traci Billingsley declined to discuss Fulks or his case, but said the process of rewriting the execution protocol is being finalized.

Death row inmates who waive their appeals are referred to as volunteers.

In Massachusetts, the Boston Globe reports, "Gary Lee Sampson defense budget ordered," by Travis Andersen.

A federal judge in Boston has ordered lawyers for serial killer Gary Lee Sampson to file a budget proposal to prepare for his sentencing retrial, where he may again face a death penalty.

“The budget should include ‘the best preliminary estimate that can be made of the cost of all services [counsel, expert, investigative, and other]’ to prepare this case for retrial concerning sentencing, and may include particular amounts for discrete phases of preparation,” US District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf wrote in an order issued on Friday.

Wolf gave Sampson’s attorneys until noon on Jan. 9 to file a budget request for their work, which will be publicly funded. A lawyer for Sampson could not be reached for comment on the order, and defense attorneys had not filed a response as of Sunday evening.

The average cost of defending a federal capital trial is $620,932, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a research organization based in Washington, D.C.

Related posts are in the federal death penalty category index.

Texas Execution

Texas conducted its 16th and final execution of 2013, last night, in Huntsville.  It was the 508th post-Furman Texas execution since 1982. Texas is responsible for more than 37% of the nation's  post-Furman executions.

"Texas executes man for corrections officer's death," is the AP report, via the Tyler Morning Telegraph.

A Texas inmate was executed Tuesday evening for the death of a corrections officer during a short-lived escape from prison six years ago.

Jerry Martin, 43, had requested that no additional appeals be filed on his behalf, clearing the way for his lethal injection.

And:

The 16 executions this year in Texas are about average in recent years for the state that accounts for nearly half of the 36 executions in the U.S. so far in 2013. Florida is second with seven. Texas has at least six scheduled for the early months of 2014.

To date there have been 36 executions in American death penalty states this year; a total of 1,356 post-Furman executions since 1977. There are several execution dates in other states set for this month.

According to TDCJ, Texas state district courts have already set six execution dates for 2014.

Slate on the Florida Execution Drugs

"Florida’s Barbaric, Disgusting Decision to Execute a Prisoner Using an Untested Drug," is by Justin Peters at Slate.

On Tuesday, a convicted murderer named William Happ was strapped to a gurney in the death chamber of the Florida State Prison and executed via lethal injection. Happ was given a three-drug cocktail that included midazolam hydrochloride, a fast-acting sedative that had never before been used in capital punishment. Many observers worried that the untested midazolam might wear off before the other drugs took effect, thus subjecting Happ to excruciating pain. Sure enough, the Associated Press reported that Happ apparently “remained conscious longer and made more body movements after losing consciousness than other people executed recently by lethal injection under the old formula.”

Like many death-penalty states, Florida has nearly exhausted its supply of the popular execution drug pentobarbital, and has been frantically searching for an effective substitute. But while other states have halted their lethal injections until they can resolve this problem—just last week, Missouri postponed the execution of Allen Nicklasson due to concerns over the efficacy of the substitute drug propofol—Florida decided to forge ahead and deploy this untested drug. The state’s haste is barbaric and disgusting, and it sends a clear and chilling message: In Florida, the death penalty has less to do with justice than vengeance.

The death penalty is currently legal in 32 states, and in all of those states, lethal injection is the primary execution method. Lethal injection was first used in America in 1982—in Texas, naturally—and was seen as a more civilized method of execution than the gas chamber or the electric chair. “We said this is really ridiculous. We kill animals more humanely than we kill people,” Dr. Jay Chapman, the father of the modern lethal-injection process, remembered to CNN in 2007.

Earlier coverage from Florida begins at the link.

Florida Executes with New LI Drug Combination

"Fla. executes man for Illinois woman’s 1986 murder," is by Brendan Farrington of the Associated Press.  It's via the Tampa Tribune.

It’s been more than 27 years since William Happ strangled Angie Crowley and 24 years since he was sentenced to die. His sentence was carried out Tuesday evening: death by chemical injection at Florida State Prison.

In a final statement, Happ expressed remorse for his actions.

And:

The execution began at 6:02 p.m. Happ’s eyes opened and he blinked several times. He closed them and opened them again two minutes later. He then yawned and his jaw dropped open.

At 6:08 p.m., the official overseeing the execution tugged at Happ’s eyelids and grasped his shoulder to check for a response. There was none.

A minute later, Happ’s head began moving back and forth and shortly thereafter his breathing stopped. He was pronounced dead at 6:16 p.m.

Happ was the first person to be executed under a new mix of drugs Florida is using for lethal injections. It appeared Happ remained conscious longer and made more body movements after losing consciousness than other people executed recently by lethal injection under the old formula.

Reuters posts, "Florida executes man with new lethal injection drug," by Bill Cotterell.

Florida prison officials on Tuesday carried out what they described as the first execution in the United States using the sedative midazolam hydrochloride in a lethal injection.

Midazolam was pumped into William Happ, 51, as the first of three drugs in a lethal injection cocktail designed to induce unconsciousness, paralysis and death by cardiac arrest, the Florida Department of Corrections said.

The Gainesville Sun reports, "Happ executed using new drug," by Morgan Watkins.  It's via the Ocala Star-Banner.

As the execution began, he closed and opened his eyes before closing them again. His mouth slowly fell open. The white sheet covering him rose and fell slightly with each breath.

Minutes ticked by on the digital clock with large red numerals on the wall behind him.

Around five minutes in, his head twitched slightly to the side and his mouth fluttered a bit. One of the men in the room checked on Happ a minute later, touching his eyelids and shoulders to see if he was unconscious. Happ didn't move.

Around 6:10 p.m., his head twitched again. At 6:15 p.m., a doctor in a white coat came into the room and shined a slim flashlight in both of his eyes before checking for a heartbeat with a stethoscope.

He was pronounced dead, and the state's sentence complete, at 6:16 p.m.

"Lauderdale Lakes woman's killer confesses before execution," is by Tonya Alanez for the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

Happ was the 80th person executed in Florida since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

He was the first to die by a new lethal-injection cocktail that death-penalty opponents had warned could result in an inhumanely painful death if it failed to work properly.

The drug, administered in three stages, first knocked Happ into unconsciousness, then induced paralysis and finally, put him into cardiac arrest.

Happ, a thin, balding man with bushy eyebrows, succumbed in what seemed like a labored process as he lay strapped to a gurney in the fluorescent-lit death chamber.

At times his eyes fluttered, he swallowed hard, his head twitched, his chest heaved.

About 30 death-penalty protesters gathered beneath steely gray skies across the road from the prison. A lone proponent made his stand.

"Florida Man Remains Conscious Longer During Execution Using Untried Drug," is at Democracy Now.

Florida has executed a convicted murderer using a never-before-used drug cocktail that appeared to make him retain consciousness longer as he died. William Happ was injected with the sedative midazolam, despite concerns it might not work properly and could inflict cruel and unusual punishment. Florida used the drug as a substitute for pentobarbital, which has been in short supply after the Danish manufacturer prohibited its use in executions. William Happ was pronounced dead 14 minutes after his execution began Tuesday evening. He reportedly appeared to remain conscious longer and to move more frequently while unconscious than prisoners given the old drug.

"Florida murderer who raped and killed woman is left writhing in agony and takes twice as long to die as he is executed using new untried lethal injection drug," is the report in the UK's Daily Mail.

A Florida man convicted of raping and murdering a 21-year-old woman in 1986 blinked repeatedly and shook his head back and forth as he was executed by lethal injection of a controversial, never-before-used drug.

William Happ, 51, was the first death row inmate to be injected with the drug midazolam hydrochloride - despite concerns it might not work as promised and could inflict cruel and unusual punishment on a death row inmate.

The execution began at 6.02pm at Florida State Prison in Starke. Happ's eyes opened and he blinked several times.

He closed them and opened them again two minutes later. He then yawned and his jaw dropped open.

At 6.08pm, the official overseeing the execution tugged at Happ's eyelids and grasped his shoulder to check for a response. There was none.

A minute later, Happ's head began moving back and forth and shortly thereafter his breathing stopped.

He was pronounced dead at 6.16pm.

Happ appeared to remain conscious for a greater length of time and made more body movements after losing consciousness than people executed by the old formula which usually kills the prisoner within seven minutes.

To date there have been 31 executions in American death penalty states this year; a total of 1,351 post-Furman executions since 1977.

Earlier coverage from Florida begins at the link.

Florida to Execute Today Using Untried Drug

Reuters posts, "Florida to execute man using untried drug for lethal injection," by Bill Cotterell.  It's via GlobalPost.

An execution scheduled in Florida on Tuesday will be the first using the drug midazolam hydrochloride despite concerns it might not work as promised and could inflict cruel and unusual punishment on a death row inmate.

Midazolam, typically used by doctors for sedation, will be the first of three drugs pumped into William Happ as part of a lethal injection cocktail designed to induce unconsciousness, paralysis and death by cardiac arrest.

The first of the drugs administered as part of the lethal injection "protocol" in Florida has long been the barbiturate pentobarbital. But Florida, and other death penalty states that use a trio of drugs as part of their injection procedures, have been running out of pentobarbital since its manufacturer clamped a ban on its use in future executions.

The 51-year-old Happ, who has abandoned his appeals and said he is ready to die, was condemned for the 1986 abduction, rape and murder of Angie Crowley, whose body was found on a canal bank near Crystal River in central Florida.

"This is somewhat of an experiment on a living human being," Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, said Monday.

"The three-drug process depends on the first drug rendering the inmate unconscious and, if he is only partially unconscious, the inmate could be experiencing extreme pain," he added. "Because the second drug paralyzes him, he would be unable to cry out or show that he's in pain."

Just last week, Missouri postponed an execution set for October 23 due to uncertainty about using a different drug, propofol, as a substitute for pentobarbital.

"Florida's use of new drug in execution spurs ethical concerns," is the Gainesville Sun report by Kristine Crane.

The Florida Department of Corrections is planning to use a lethal injection drug today that has never been used before in executions, raising ethical concerns by legal experts throughout the nation.

The drug, midazolam hydrochloride, which is commercially known as Versed, would be used for the first time in the scheduled execution of William Happ, 50, who has been on death row for 27 years for killing and raping 21-year-old Angie Crowley in Crystal River in 1986.

A spokeswoman from the Department of Corrections said it has limited supplies of the drug it had been using — pentobarbital sodium — so it switched to Versed.

The nation has seen a shortage of the drug since its maker, Danish company Lundbeck, stopped shipping the drug to prisons where executions take place.

And:

Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University in New York who has studied lethal injection procedures in the U.S., said that the drug companies have more to gain than lose by discontinuing sales to prisons.

“These drugs are not money-makers for companies, so I think it’s not worth it to a manufacturer to get embroiled in a process that could have a negative impact on other drug sales,” Denno said.

She added that it’s possible — and there’s even been some indication — that the drugs could be acquired by prison hospitals for surgeries and then used for executions.

Some states, such as Texas, are getting pentobarbital from compounding pharmacies. But no states apart from Florida have switched to Versed, which is normally used as a sedative before surgery and has never been used in an execution.

“These drugs weren’t made to kill people … they were made with another purpose in mind. It’s unknown how they’re going to work,” Denno said.

"Execution with new drug set for Tuesday," by Bill Cotterell at the Florida Current.

His scheduled lethal injection marks Florida's 80th execution since capital punishment was resumed in 1977. It's the first, however, involving midazolam hydrochloride, an anesthetic that replaces pentobarbital as the first of three drugs administered in an execution.

Capital punishment opponents contend that the new drug might not completely knock out the condemned man, permitting him to suffer silently as the next two drugs -- the paralytic vecuronium bromide and heart-stopping potassium chloride -- are administered.

"This is somewhat of an experiment on a living human being," Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, said Monday. "The three-drug process depends on the first drug rendering the inmate unconscious and, if he is only partially unconscious, the inmate could be experiencing extreme pain.

"But because the second drug paralyzes him, he would be unable to cry out or show that he's in pain."

Miami New Times posts, "Florida's New Execution Procedure Considered Too "Cruel" For Use on Animals," by Terrence McCoy.

William Happ, who's spent the last 27 years on death row for raping and killing a 21-year-old in 1986, will be the first person today to experience a new execution serum that, across the nation, only Florida has been willing to use.

The drug, called midazolam hydrochloride, will be the first of a triumvirate of serums pumped into Happ, who has abandoned all of his appeals and said he's willing to die. The Florida Department of Corrections has changed serums in light of a nationwide shortage of the traditional pentobarbital sodium. Its manufacturer, a Danish company called Lundbeck, has stopped sending the drug to prisons where executions occur.

No one's quite sure if the new drug, which should put Happ under, will work as promised. And therein lies the rub, because if the drug doesn't work, the second serum dumped into him -- to induce paralysis -- will make it impossible for him to express discomfort or pain.

But Florida Department of Corrections Spokeswoman Misty Cash expressed little concern. "We believe this protocol is the most humane and dignified way of carrying out the rule of the state," she told Riptide. "We only have a limited supplies of the old drug and they'll expire in November, so we had to come up with a new protocol."

She declined to elaborate on how that decision was made. "We're not going to get into a discussion of how or why it was chosen," Cash said.

Earlier coverage from Florida begins at the link.  Related posts are in the international and lethal injection indexes.

To date there have been 30 executions in American death penalty states this year; a total of 1,350 post-Furman executions since 1977.  An inmate who waives his or her appeals in referred to as a volunteer.

Texas Volunteer

"Death row cellphone smuggling figure seeks to end appeals," is by Mike Ward in the Austin American-Statesman.

Richard Tabler, whose threatening calls from a smuggled cellphone prompted an unprecedented lockdown of the Texas prison system five years ago, is asking to end his court appeals and be executed.

“My victim’s family members are being denied the justice they deserve” Tabler, 34, said in a letter to the American-Statesman received Tuesday. The letter parallels an Aug. 13 request he made to the federal court that is handling his appeal in a Killeen double murder case.

So far, his lawyer is opposing Tabler’s request to drop his appeals.

Tabler faces execution for the fatal shootings of Mohammed-Amine Rahmouni, 28, and Haitham Zayed, 25, in 2004 in a remote area of Killeen. Evidence showed Rahmouni was the manager of a strip club who banned Tabler from his place and Zayed was a friend of Rahmouni.

Tabler also has acknowledged killing two dancers from the club. He was charged with those slayings, but was never tried.

He made headlines in October 2008 when he was busted in his death row cell for using a smuggled cellphone to call several people, including state Sen. John Whitmire, who heads the committee that monitors prisons. Those calls prompted a lockdown of the entire prison system that turned up hundreds of contraband cellphones and prompted the installation of security checkpoints and electronic screening equipment at many of Texas’ state prisons.

And:

His appellate attorney, Marcia Widder of Atlanta, referred the Statesman to filings she recently made to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Mr. Tabler previously sought on multiple occasions to waive proceedings in the district court so that he could be executed,” Widder said in a Sept. 6 filing. Based on previous court rulings denying his request, she noted, Tabler’s latest request “should be denied and this case should continue to move forward.”

No execution date has been scheduled for Tabler, whose appeals likely still have years to run. In past court filings, his lawyers have raised questions about whether he is mentally competent to make such a decision.

Earlier coverage of Richard Tabler begins at the link.

An Update From Alabama

"Legal challenges continue to slow Alabama executions," is by Bob Johnson of Associated Press.  It's via the Gadsden Times.  Here's an extended excerpt from the beginning:

Andrew Lackey’s execution late last month was the first in Alabama since 2011, when the state had six executions. Overall, the pace of executions has slowed in the state as challenges over issues such as the drugs and protocol used mount.

Attorneys say courts allowed the execution of Lackey — convicted in the 2005 shooting and beating death of an 80-year-old Limestone County man — to proceed July 25 by lethal injection mainly because he had dropped his appeals, and they expect legal challenges to continue to slow the pace of Alabama executions.

A leading anti-death penalty attorney, Bryan Stevenson of Montgomery, said it’s doubtful additional executions will occur in the near future unless the death row inmate has dropped the appeals process.

“There are outstanding questions about the execution protocol,” Stevenson said

Previously, Alabama was using sodium thiopental as a key drug in the protocol. After a nationwide shortage of the drug, the state’s supply was seized by the federal Drug Enforcement Agency in 2011. At that point the state began using pentobarbital in a three-drug protocol. That process has been challenged, but Assistant Attorney General Clay Crenshaw said there are no pending cases involving the current drug protocol.

Attorneys questioned the effectiveness of the drugs after Alabama inmate Eddie Powell appeared to be awake even after the drugs were administered.

Much of the slowdown in executions was caused by the case of death row inmate Tommy Arthur, who has been in prison for about 30 years for the 1982 contract killing of Troy Wicker at Wicker’s residence in Muscle Shoals.

Arthur’s is a complicated, lengthy case that has been lingering in state and federal courts for decades. Crenshaw said the case is awaiting a ruling from U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller on a challenge of the drug protocol used in execution.

Earlier coverage from Alabama begins at the link.

Alabama Executes Volunteer

Alabama.com posts, "Andrew Lackey executed for 2005 murder of World War II veteran," by Mike Cason.

Andrew Reid Lackey was executed by lethal injection tonight for the 2005 murder of an 80-year-old World War II veteran he was trying to rob.

Lackey, 29, was pronounced dead at 6:25 p.m. at Holman Correctional Facility.

He became the first inmate executed in Alabama since Christopher T. Johnson of Escambia County received a lethal injection Oct. 20, 2011.

A Limestone County jury convicted Lackey in 2008. He had dropped all appeals and asked for his execution to be scheduled.

Earlier coverage of Andrew Lackey's case is at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

Alabama Volunteer

"1st execution in Alabama since 2011 set for Thursday," is the AP report, via the Montgomery Advertiser.

Alabama’s second execution in almost two years is scheduled for Thursday at Holman Prison in Atmore.

Court records show that 30-year-old Andrew Lackey asked the state to set his execution date, and has not taken action to stop it.

Lackey is scheduled to die by lethal injection at Holman Prison in Atmore for the beating and shooting death of 80-year-old Charles Newman during a 2005 Halloween night robbery at Newnan’s home in Limestone County. Lackey is to be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m. Thursday.

Lackey would be the first inmate executed in Alabama since Christopher T. Johnson of Escambia County received a lethal injection Oct. 20, 2011. He was the sixth inmate executed in 2011.

And:

Bryan Stevenson, an attorney with the Montgomery-based Equal Justice Initiative, said both the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals and the trial court have ruled that the state can go ahead with Lackey’s execution.

Stevenson said he and other attorneys opposed to Lackey being executed “have argued that he is mentally ill.”

“Our point is that he needs to be examined,” Stevenson said.

Earlier coverage from Alabama begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

Oregon Supreme Court Rules Governor Has Reprieve Authority

The Oregon Supreme Court ruling in Haugen v. Kitzhaber is available in Adobe .pdf format.

The Oregonian posts, "Oregon Supreme Court denies death row inmate Gary Haugen's bid for execution," by Helen Jung.

Oregon death row inmate Gary Haugen cannot legally force Gov. John Kitzhaber to carry out his execution, the Oregon Supreme Court decided Thursday.

Rather, the governor has the legal authority to delay the twice-conicted killer's execution, the court said, despite the inmate's insistence that he be put to death.

The court's decision reverses a trial court judge's decision last August that sided with arguments from Haugen and his attorney Harrison Latto that Haugen must accept the governor's reprieve for it to be valid.

"Oregon court upholds governor's execution delay," is AP coverage filed by Jonathan J. Cooper.  It's via the Evening Sun.

Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber can delay the lethal injection of a death-row inmate who wants to waive his appeals and speed his execution, the state's highest court ruled Thursday.

The Oregon Supreme Court said Kitzhaber did not overstep his power when he granted a reprieve delaying the death sentence of Gary Haugen, who was convicted of two murders.

Kitzhaber opposes the death penalty and intervened weeks before Haugen was scheduled to be executed in 2011. The governor said he refused to allow an execution under a state death-penalty system he views as broken.

Haugen challenged Kitzhaber's clemency, saying the reprieve was invalid because Haugen refused to accept it. He also argued that it wasn't actually a reprieve but rather an illegal attempt by the governor to nullify a law he didn't like. The justices rejected both arguments.

The governor argued that his clemency power is absolute, and nobody—certainly not an inmate on death row—can prevent him from doing what he believes to be in the state's best interest.

Kitzhaber has urged a statewide vote on abolishing the death penalty, although the Legislature has shown little interest in putting it on the ballot in 2014.

Earlier coverage of the case begins with oral arguments held last summer before the Oregon Supreme Court.  Also available, more recent coverage of a repeal measure heard by the legislature.

Related posts are in the clemency category index.

South Dakota Executes 2nd Volunteer in October

"Groups gather outside pen to oppose death penalty," is the AP report, via the Mitchell Daily Republic.

Pax Christi co-chair Leona Wieland says people aren't gathering to protest but to pray, sing and sit in quiet. She says the nondenominational Christian group believes in upholding the sacredness of all life.

South Dakotans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty members are hoping to abolish the death penalty in South Dakota through legislative appeal.

Coordinator Travis Schulze says the group doesn't plan to introduce a bill for next year's session because it would likely die in committee. He says the group wants to get churches involved to encourage more conservative legislators to support repeal.

The AP also reports on the execution of Donald Moeller, "Mother: Execution brings relief, not closure," by Dirk Lammers.  It's via the Knoxville News Sentinel.

Moeller then was administered a lethal injection of pentobarbital and took about eight heavy breaths before his breathing stopped and Moeller turned slightly pink.

Moeller's eyes remained open as his skin turned ashen, then purple. The coroner then checked for vital signs, and Moeller was pronounced dead at 10:24 p.m.

It was South Dakota's second execution this month, and the 34th execution in American death penalty states this year.  There have been 1,311 post-Furman executions since 1977.

Earlier coverage from South Dakota begins at the link.

 

Oregon Supreme Court to Review Reprieve Issue

Today's Salem Statesman Journal reports, "Oregon Supreme Court to hear Haugen case appeal."  It's by Peter Wong.

The Oregon Supreme Court has agreed to hear Gov. John Kitzhaber’s appeal of Gary Haugen’s refusal to accept a reprieve of a death sentence.

Oral arguments are scheduled at 10:30 a.m. March 14 at the University of Oregon law school. The court normally hears arguments annually at each of the state’s three law schools.

The justices will hear arguments on a single point: Whether someone such as Haugen must accept a reprieve offered by the governor under the Oregon Constitution for it to be effective.

Kitzhaber issued the reprieve on Nov. 22, 2011, two weeks before Haugen was scheduled to be executed at the Oregon State Penitentiary. Haugen had waived further legal appeals, and has said he wants to die.

Haugen sued Kitzhaber, arguing that he had a right to refuse a reprieve, unlike a pardon or commutation. A judge agreed with him Aug. 3, and set the execution back on track.

However, a second date for an execution cannot proceed in Marion County Circuit Court until the current civil lawsuit is concluded. The Supreme Court hearing will bypass the Court of Appeals.

"Oregon Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal in Haugen execution case," by Helen Jung in the Oregonian.

The state's highest court has agreed to hear Gov. John Kitzhaber's appeal of a decision that ruled his reprieve last November of death-row inmate Gary Haugen's execution was invalid.

Kitzhaber's attorney had sought review by the Oregon Supreme Court because of the nature of the case, which focuses on the scope of the governor's authority. Typically, the Oregon Court of Appeals would be the first venue, but appellate judges, as well as Haugen's attorney, endorsed the request for the Supreme Court to take the case.

KATU-TV posts the AP filing, "Haugen death penalty fight heads to Oregon Supreme Court."

Gary Haugen says he wants to die and has stopped appealing his aggravated murder conviction.  

Gov. John Kitzhaber has vowed there will be no executions while he is governor. He issued the reprieve in November of last year.

A Marion County Circuit Court judge ruled in August that Haugen has the right to refuse the reprieve. The governor's appeal went straight to the state supreme court. 

Earlier coverage of the Oregon case begins at the link.

South Dakota Roundup

Today's Sioux Falls Argus Leader reports, "Death penalty pending request for stay," by John Hult.

A federal judge said he will decide soon whether to stay the execution of twice-convicted murderer Donald Moeller after an attempt by an acquaintance to intervene in his case.

Donna Nichols, a woman who is not related to Moeller but refers to herself as a stepsister, filed a motion to be appointed “next friend” to him in an effort to continue an appeal Moeller chose to end earlier this month.

If appointed “next friend,” Nichols could act on behalf of Moeller and continue the appeal, which challenges the state’s execution protocol.

Moeller is scheduled to die by lethal injection during the week of Oct. 28 for the 1990 rape and murder of Becky O’Connell.

Judge Lawrence Piersol heard arguments Monday morning from Robert Van Norman, Nichols’ lawyer, as well as Moeller’s lawyer, Mark Marshall, and Attorney General Marty Jackley.

Marshall and Jackley both said Nichols lacks standing to intervene on behalf of Moeller, whom Piersol ruled was competent to end his appeal after a lengthy verbal exchange in court.

Regarding last week's South Dakota execution, the Argus Leader reports, "Death penalty called incentive for Robert," also by Hult.

The lawyer for a man executed this week says the death penalty created an incentive for his client to murder corrections officer Ronald “R.J.” Johnson.

Mark Kadi, who represented 50-year-old Eric Robert in the capital case, wrote a letter to the Argus Leader saying his client devised an escape plan that involved murder to ensure a death sentence in the event his escape failed.

“The availability of the death penalty encouraged rather than discouraged Robert to commit this crime,” Kadi wrote. “I know this because Eric told me so.”

After the murder in April 2011, Robert quickly pleaded guilty and insisted the judge issue a death penalty, then strongly objected to a mandatory Supreme Court review, which delayed his execution. He wrote a letter to Attorney General Marty Jackley earlier this month encouraging revisions to state law to guarantee a speedy death for a death row inmate who was not fighting it.

Jackley, who prosecuted the case, rejects the notion that Johnson’s murder was anything but a failed, “poorly executed” escape attempt.

Attorney Mark Kadi's letter to the Argus Leader is available in Adobe .pdf format.

"Lawyer: Death penalty gave SD inmate Robert incentive to kill guard during escape attempt," is the AP report, via the Republic.

A man executed for killing a South Dakota prison guard wanted to commit suicide and saw the death penalty law as an incentive, the man's attorney says.

Eric Robert was put to death last week for killing the guard, Ronald "R.J." Johnson, when he and fellow inmate Rodney Berget tried to break out of the prison in April 2011.

Robert pleaded guilty in September 2011 to killing Johnson, asked for a death sentence and objected to a South Dakota Supreme Court review of his case.

Robert was serving an 80-year prison term for kidnapping at the time of his attempted escape. His lawyer, Mark Kadi, said Robert wanted to end his own life rather than languish in prison, and planned his escape so that he would be eligible for a death sentence if unsuccessful.

"The availability of the death penalty encouraged rather than discouraged Robert to commit this crime," Kadi wrote in a letter to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader newspaper. "I know this because Eric told me so."

Earlier coverage from South Dakota begins at the link. 

Volunteer is the term applied to inmates on death row who waive their appeals.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

South Dakota Volunteer's Letter to AG

Today's Sioux Falls Argus Leader reports, "Executed man asks S. Dakota to change law for swifter justice."  It's by John Hult.

The man executed Monday night for the murder of a corrections officer wrote a letter to South Dakota’s Attorney General asking the state to clarify its death penalty statutes and make it easier for swift executions to be carried out for willing inmates.

The letter from Eric Robert, dated Oct. 8, was released Tuesday afternoon by Attorney General Marty Jackley in response to media requests.

Robert had asked for and received a death sentence for the murder of Officer Ronald “R.J.” Johnson on April 12, 2011. He was put to death by lethal injection Monday night at the South Dakota State Penitentiary.

In the letter, Robert commends Jackley on his conduct in prosecuting the case, although he took issue with the presentation of prior criminal behavior designed, he said, to wrap Robert in a “cloak of evil.”

“However, we did agree on the main point; that in this case my actions deserved the death penalty,” Robert wrote.

Robert did not appeal his sentence, but the state Supreme Court delayed Robert’s initial May execution date to complete a mandatory sentence review. Robert fought the delay through filings from his lawyer challenging the court’s authority to issue a stay in the absence of an appeal or an order for clemency from the governor.

And:

At the end of the letter, Robert encourages Jackley to consider proposing a change to the language of the state’s death penalty statutes to ensure sentence reviews are completed in time to carry out the execution as originally scheduled.

Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Hunt read Robert’s letter Tuesday but said the purpose of the sentence review in a death penalty case is important enough to allow for delays.

The court must determine that a sentence is based on true facts and that the procedural rules were followed to protect a person’s constitutional rights. If a delay is necessary for that reason, Hunt said, it amounts to a reasonable delay.

“This is a matter of life,” Hunt said. “I can appreciate Eric Robert’s situation and his wanting to move forward. I’m sure Officer Johnson’s family wanted it to move forward. But I think history shows us that it helps to take a little more time in these matters.”

Sen. David Lust, the majority leader from Rapid City, agreed, pointing out that Robert’s decision to avoid appeals altogether was incredibly unique.

“I’ve never been a proponent of making a law based on one example,” Lust said. “Unless you can show a compelling need for a law that would apply to all citizens, we don’t need one.”

"Jackley releases letter from killer Robert," is the AP report, via Sioux City Journal.

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley is releasing a letter he received last week from an inmate executed Monday night.

The letter dated Oct. 8 from convicted killer Eric Robert reiterates Robert's earlier statements about the death penalty statute. Robert was executed Monday night for the killing of prison guard Ronald Johnson.

In the letter, Robert calls on Jackley to push for a change in the death penalty law to allow for quicker executions in cases where the person is not contesting the sentence.

Eric Robert's letter is available in Adobe .pdf format, via the Argus Leader, as well as KELO-TV.

Earlier coverage of the South Dakota execution begins at the link.

Volunteer is the term applied to inmates on death row who waive their appeals.  Related posts are in the volunteer category index.

South Dakota Executes

Today's Duluth News Tribune posts the AP report, "South Dakota executes former Superior man who killed guard," written by Dave Kolpack.

Eric Robert, 50, received lethal injection and was pronounced dead at the state penitentiary in Sioux Falls. He is the first South Dakota inmate to die under the state’s new single-drug lethal injection method, and only the 17th person to be executed in the state or Dakota Territory since 1877.

Robert had no expression on his face. Asked by the Warden if he had a last statement, Robert said, “In the name of justice and liberty and mercy, I authorize and forgive Warden Douglas Weber to execute me for the crimes. It is done.”

As the drug was administered, the clean-shaven Robert, wearing orange inmate pants with a white blanket wrapped around his upper body, appeared to be clearing his throat and then began to make heavy gasps. He started snoring for about 30 seconds. His eyes remained opened throughout and his skin turned pale, eventually gaining a purplish hue.

And:

Robert’s execution could be the first of two in as many weeks. Donald Moeller is scheduled to be put to death the week of Oct. 28 for the 1990 kidnapping, rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. Robert had been on death row only for about a year, Moeller has been there for more than two decades. Only three other inmates currently are on the state’s death row.

South Dakota’s last execution before Monday took place in 2007, and that was the first in the state for 60 years.

"Only One Drug To Be Used For Execution," is from KELO-TV.

On Monday morning, officials confirmed that just one drug will be used.

How many drugs are used is determined by when the inmate is convicted and the availability of the drugs.

The shortage of one of the drugs in the three drug lethal injection procedure has actually prompted more states to adopt the one drug protocol. The drug in short supply is sodium thiopental.

Instead, officials with the South Dakota Department of Corrections will give Robert a single lethal dose of the drug Pentobarbitol.

The Sioux Falls Argus Leader reports, "Execution: Opposing sides seek peace at vigil."  It's by Jonathan Ellis.

The execution of Eric Robert for the April 2011 murder of Corrections Officer Ronald “R.J.” Johnson brought death penalty opponents back to the state penitentiary. Many there also were present more than five years ago, the last time the state executed an inmate.

One was Elaine Engelgau, who sat in a chair by the side of the road holding a sign that read, “End the Death Penalty.”

“There’s nothing more important than life,” she said. “To take someone’s life that only God can give, I just think it’s wrong.”

But the death penalty opponents didn’t have the field to themselves. Polls show that a majority of South Dakotans support the death penalty, and they were represented by others who turned out to see Robert’s sentence carried out.

John Hult of the Argus Leader writes, "Execution: Witnessing death is final step in sad saga."

Through the window of a tiny exam room, seven other people and I watched Robert heave his last breaths and speak his last words.

Two were deputies for Attorney General Marty Jackley, who watched the death from one of the other three rooms. A reporter from the Associated Press and I joined them, Minnehaha County Jail Warden Darin Young and three other employees of the DOC in the room.

My job as a media witness was to observe, walk back to a briefing room in the Ronald “R.J.” Johnson training center and answer questions from other reporters about what happened.

I’d never witnessed an execution until last night, so I called three reporters who had, to gather insight.

The consensus: The death itself, so long as nothing goes wrong, essentially is a non-event for the witnesses.

"Death penalty not in our names," the OpEd by Sister Kay O'Neil in the Aberdeen News.  She is the Chair of the Presentation Sisters Social Justice Team.

The Roman Catholic Bishops of South Dakota, Bishop Paul Swain, Sioux Falls, and Bishop Robert Gruss, in their recent statement regarding impending executions and the death penalty have invited us to “prayerfully reflect on the role of the state as an agent of death.” Last night, and in the coming weeks, the state of South Dakota will execute three persons. The Presentation Sisters Social Justice Team says, “Not in our names.”

To date, there have been 32 executions in American death penalty states this year; a total of 1,309 post-Furman executions since 1977.

Earlier coverage from South Dakota begins at the link.

South Dakota Execution Date Set for Volunteer

"South Dakota Preps For Rare Execution of Inmate," is the AP post by Steve Eder.  It's via the Wall Street Journal Law blog.

A South Dakota judge has issued a death warrant for convicted murderer Eric Donald Robert, bringing the state one step closer to its first  execution in more than five years.

On Friday, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said the execution is set for the week of Oct. 14.  Last week, an appeals court upheld the death penalty conviction of Mr. Robert, who pleaded guilty to killing a prison guard. Mr. Robert had asked for capital punishment for his crime.

An execution is a rare occurrence in South Dakota, where there’s been only one prisoner killed by the state in the past 65 years and there are just five prisoners on death row, including Mr. Robert. The last to be executed was convicted murderer Elijah Page in July, 2007.

What’s also unique about Mr. Robert’s case is the short time period – just 18 months – between the murder and his execution date. Many death penalty cases take well over a decade to work their way through the courts.

"South Dakota schedules first execution in five years," is the Reuters report by David Bailey.

A South Dakota inmate, who killed a prison guard during a failed escape attempt, has been scheduled to die by lethal injection in October in what would be the state's first execution in five years, officials said on Friday.

Eric Robert, who had pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of guard Ronald Johnson at the South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, waived his right to let a jury decide whether the death penalty should be imposed and has sought execution.

Robert had been serving an 80-year term for the 2005 kidnapping of a young woman when he tried to escape in April 2011.

South Dakota Circuit Court Judge Bradley Zell issued the warrant for the execution, which is set to be carried out anytime from Oct. 14 through Oct. 20 under South Dakota law, the state attorney general said on Friday.

The warden at the state penitentiary sets the date and time for the execution, which is announced publicly within 48 hours of the actual date under state law, the attorney general said.

The South Dakota Supreme Court last week upheld the death penalty, adding Robert's consistent attempts to have the execution carried out quickly had no impact on its ruling.

Related posts are in the execution date and volunteer indexes.

Oregon Capital Punishment Debate Continues

Today's Oregonian publishes, "Maintain Gov. John Kitzhaber's death penalty moratorium on Gary Haugen."  It's written by David McNeil of Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

The Oregonian's editorial "Time to let Haugen die" (Aug. 7) provides a review of the Gary Haugen saga. I take exception, however, both to the title and to the conclusion. The title frames the issue -- inappropriately in my view -- as a question of Haugen's "right to die." Oregonians have compassionately provided such a right to those whose lives are being artificially prolonged and to terminal patients under carefully defined circumstances. Haugen falls into neither category, and framing the issue in this way obscures what is really at stake. A more frank and accurate title for the editorial would be "Oregon should kill Gary Haugen now."

So what is the rationale for this position?

The writer assumes that Judge Timothy Alexander's decision settles the issue legally. It doesn't. In reality, his opinion is based on an archaic 1833 U.S. Supreme Court doctrine that was rejected by that court in 1927. Because the doctrine, concerning the effectiveness of a governor's clemency order, found its way into decisions of the Oregon Supreme Court, Alexander felt compelled to follow it.

The issue is a serious one of constitutional law and deserves to be reconsidered by the Oregon Supreme Court. It's not "too bad" that the governor may appeal, and it's far from a "bizarre sideshow."

The writer also appears concerned about the cost to taxpayers of the governor pursuing such an appeal. That cost, however, is minuscule compared with the millions of taxpayer dollars spent every year pursuing death sentences, and it is probably substantially less than the cost of conducting Haugen's execution.

Like the rest of his companions on death row, Haugen was condemned to die for committing horrific murders. He's not a sympathetic figure. What distinguishes him from them, however, and the reason he's front-page news, is that he is "cool" with being executed. The bottom line for the editorial is a mere guess that it's "cool" with most Oregonians, too.

For me, and I expect for other readers, there's something unsettling both about giving Haugen so much publicity and about acceding to his death wish.

Earlier commentary from Oregon begins at the link.

More Commentary From Oregon

Today's Oregonian publishes the OpEd, "We shouldn't execute Gary Haugen until we finish the death penalty debate."  It's by Jeffrey Ellis, director of the Oregon Capital Resource Center.

It is not time to give Haugen "a date with the executioner," because we are not "allowing" Haugen to die. We are considering whether we want to continue killing people in all of our names. When we execute a human being, we do it in all of our names. It's our choice, not his. When Kitzhaber declared the moratorium, he did so consistent with the power granted to him by the people through the Oregon Constitution. The ruling by Marion County Circuit Judge Timothy Alexander takes that power from the people. His ruling would require us to execute someone who we all agreed was not even eligible for the death penalty. The Oregonian was wrong to endorse such a flawed and dangerous decision.

It's time to begin the death penalty debate in earnest. Haugen will need to wait until we Oregonians have finished our discussion at the ballot box.

"Governor right to stop executions, coalition says." is the Catholic Sentinel news report.

"A coalition opposing the death penalty says Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber used his powers appropriately when he declared a moratorium on executions last year.

The question arose last week when Circuit Court Judge Timothy Alexander ruled that an Oregon death row inmate can refuse the reprieve given by the governor.  

Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, which includes leaders of the Archdiocese of Portland, expressed disappointment with Alexander's decision and predicted it would be overturned on appeal to a higher court.

Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty advocates for life without the possibility of parole as a means of keeping the public safe and dealing with those convicted of aggravated murder.

"As a public policy, the death penalty fails on the basis that money is spent with the expectation that some good will be derived by the citizens of the state," says Ron Steiner, the organization's chairman and a member of Queen of Peace Parish in Salem. "There is no public good derived from an execution. The death penalty is a failed public policy and should be voted out by the people."

When Kitzhaber said he would not allow executions on his watch, he also called for a “long overdue debate on the death penalty” and urged the Legislature and the people to fix it.

"When all the facts are known, it becomes difficult to defend the death penalty system in Oregon," Steiner says.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

An Update From Oregon - News & Commentary

The Salem Statesman reports, "Appeal will halt Haugen's death warrant proceedings."  It's written by Peter Wong.

Death-row inmate Gary Haugen will have to wait a little longer for the setting of a date for his death warrant.

Although a judge ruled Friday that Haugen has the legal right to reject a reprieve from Gov. John Kitzhaber, a hearing for a new date will have to follow the conclusion of Haugen’s lawsuit against Kitzhaber.

That is unlikely to occur soon.

Kitzhaber said he would appeal the decision by Timothy Alexander, a senior judge from Washington County assigned to the case in Marion County Circuit Court.

Kitzhaber has 30 days from the time the decision is made official to file an appeal with the Oregon Court of Appeals. He is represented by the Oregon Department of Justice.

“If (and that is the key) either of the parties exercise their right to appeal the trial court decision, then that likely would stay any trial court proceeding to issue a death warrant,” said Phil Lemman, a spokesman for the Oregon Judicial Department, which operates the courts.

Alexander specified that Haugen would have to request a hearing that would set a date for a new death warrant. That hearing also would be in Marion County Circuit Court, and Alexander likely would preside.

It was unlikely that proceedings for a death warrant would go forward until the current litigation is resolved.

"Gary Haugen should be allowed to die," is the Oregonian editorial.

Gov. John Kitzhaber argued last fall that his decision to halt executions for the rest of his term was a matter of principle. After approving a pair of executions during his first term, he wrote in November, he questioned the decisions repeatedly before deciding never again to participate in something he considers morally wrong.

The governor's qualms are understandable, as is his desire for the Legislature to revisit capital punishment. Nonetheless, it's time to give two-term killer Gary Haugen what he wants: a date with the executioner.

And:

The governor should turn his focus, instead, to the larger issue, and the Legislature should work with him to fix it. You could make a compelling case that Oregon would be better off without the death penalty at all. You also could make a compelling case that Oregon should have a death penalty that lives up to its name. What you can't make a good case for, though, is the status quo.

Today's Eugene Register-Guard publishes the editorial, "A gift can be rejected."

A reprieve is a gift, and a gift can be rejected. So ruled a judge in a macabre legal clash between Gov. John Kitzhaber and Gary Haugen, a death row inmate. The ruling is sure to be appealed.

And:

Kitzhaber can govern with a clear conscience even if Haugen goes to the execution chamber. He did what he could to produce a different result, but Haugen insisted that a sentence approved by Oregon’s voters and courts be carried out.

Changing or repealing the state’s death penalty law would be a worthwhile project for Kitzhaber and other Oregonians who don’t want people to be killed in their names. But for now the law stands, and Haugen can choose to slap away a hand extended in mercy.

"Death penalty shouldn't stand as Oregon law," is Ron Steiner's OpEd in today's Oregonian.  He's with Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

The Oregonian's Aug. 7 editorial "Time to let Haugen die," about convicted killer Gary Haugen's fight to be executed, makes some good points and misses a few that should be included.

We agree with the statements that "the governor's qualms" about the death penalty "are understandable"; that Judge Timothy Alexander is "no fan of capital punishment"; and "You could make a compelling case that Oregon would be better off without the death penalty at all."

And:

We all abhor the crimes that Haugen has committed. Why should we resort to more killing to allow a convicted killer to get his wish? Life without the possibility of parole might be a more fitting punishment.

The editorial's point that "spending more public money to keep Gary Haugen from receiving a penalty he accepts" -- noted in the last line -- is a mere pittance compared with the millions upon millions of dollars we waste on our flawed death penalty system.

Let's get rid of the death penalty entirely and place those dollars in programs that really do work to reduce violent crime and save young children from taking the unfortunate path that Haugen was placed on. We encourage Gov. John Kitzhaber to appeal and uphold his right to declare the moratorium on executions. We encourage all Oregonians to engage in the debate and learn the facts about the death penalty. It is a failed public policy that is very hard to defend.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

Oregon Judge Rules for Inmate; Governor Expected to Appeal

Judge Timothy Alexander's ruling in Haugen v. Kitzhaber is available via Scribd.

"Judge allows Ore. death-row inmate Gary Haugen to reject governor’s reprieve," is the AP post, via the Washington Post.

A condemned inmate who says he wants to die can reject a reprieve from the death penalty issued by Oregon’s governor, a judge ruled Friday in a case that probes the limits on the governor’s power.

Circuit Court Senior Judge Timothy Alexander ruled that convicted killer Gary Haugen is not required to accept clemency from Gov. John Kitzhaber. The governor’s office says an appeal to a higher court is likely.

Last year, Haugen said he would voluntarily waive legal appeals that could delay his execution for years and fought to speed his punishment in protest of a criminal justice system that he says is broken.

But Kitzhaber, who opposes capital punishment, said no executions would occur while he is governor. Weeks before Haugen was scheduled to die by lethal injection last December, Kitzhaber issued an order preventing the execution for the rest of his time in office.

“We are confident that the governor’s authority will be upheld,” Kitzhaber spokeswoman Amy Wojcicki said. “We are currently reviewing the case and will likely appeal.”

Alexander, the judge, said a hearing will be set to establish an execution date “as soon as this decision is final.” In his ruling, he said that he agrees with many of Kitzhaber’s concerns about the death penalty but that precedents from higher courts support Haugen’s argument.

“My decision...is not intended to be a criticism of Governor Kitzhaber or the views he has expressed...” Alexander wrote. But, he added, “I’m required to set aside my personal views and decide this case on its merits and the law.”

The case raises the question of how much power the governor has under the Oregon Constitution to grant clemency. Lawyers for Kitzhaber argued that his authority is “broad and virtually unfettered.”

"Judge rules inmate Gary Haugen, seeking execution, has right to reject governor's reprieve," by Bryan Denson for the Oregonian.

Alexander, a state senior judge handling the case in Marion County, wrote that he put his personal feelings aside, ruling on legal precedent and the facts of the case. He took the unusual step of writing that his decision wasn't intended as criticism of Kitzhaber or the views the governor expressed when he issued the reprieve in November.

"In fact," Alexander wrote, "I agree with many of the concerns expressed by the governor, and share his hope that the Legislature will be receptive to modifying and improving Oregon laws regarding sentencing for aggravated murder.

"Many Oregon judges with experience presiding over death penalty cases would concur that the current law requires spending extraordinary sums of tax dollars that could be better used for other purposes to enforce a system that rarely if ever result in executions."

Alexander's opinion says that Kitzhaber can give Haugen a reprieve until he leaves office, but Haugen is not obliged to accept it.

"Because (Haugen) has unequivocally rejected the reprieve, it is therefore ineffective," the judge wrote.

"Judge rules in favor of Haugen," by Peter Wong in the Salem Statesman Journal.

Death row inmate Gary Haugen won the first round Friday in his legal battle with Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber.

But Haugen’s execution by lethal injection at the Oregon State Penitentiary isn’t imminent.

A judge ruled that Haugen has a legal right to reject the reprieve Kitzhaber ordered, but a separate hearing is required to set a new date for an execution. That hearing has yet to be set.

Haugen’s lawyer, Harrison Latto of Portland, was still reviewing the decision by Judge Timothy Alexander, a senior judge from Washington County assigned to hear the case.

“No reaction, but it seems likely that the governor will pursue an appeal,” Latto wrote in an email to the Statesman Journal.

Minutes after Alexander released his decision, Kitzhaber indicated his intention to do just that.

“We are confident that the governor’s authority will be upheld,” said Amy Wojcicki, a spokeswoman for the governor. “We are currently reviewing the case and will likely appeal.”

The governor is represented in this proceeding by the Oregon Department of Justice.

Because it is a civil lawsuit by Haugen against Kitzhaber, an appeal would have to be filed with the Oregon Court of Appeals 30 days after Alexander’s decision becomes official. The appeals court does not have a deadline to hear the case, and it would seek written arguments first.

It technically is not an appeal of a conviction carrying the death penalty. Those cases generally go directly to the Oregon Supreme Court for review.

Even when a new execution date is set, it’s unlikely the courts would let Haugen be put to death until the conclusion of the civil lawsuit.

Back in 1958, the most recent instance in which a governor granted a reprieve, the courts and then-Gov. Robert Holmes delayed an execution of a death warrant for convicted murderer Billy Junior Nunn. Holmes commuted Nunn’s sentence to life in prison five days before he left office in 1959, and a few weeks after the Supreme Court upheld his authority to do so.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

An Arizona Volunteer

Today's Arizona Republic reports, "Hausner insists he's sane in handwritten letter," by Michael Kiefer.

In a handwritten letter received Thursday by The Arizona Republic, convicted "Serial Shooter" Dale Hausner insisted he is sane enough to be granted his request that he be executed without undergoing lengthy appeals.

"The State of AZ wanted me to get the death penalty before and during my trial. I was found guilty and given six death sentences," he wrote. "Now that I want to get executed, suddenly my mental state is in question. ... I am not insane, I am of sound mind. I simply wish to get the punishment handed down to me, but more quickly. I mean really, what's a guy got to do to get snuffed out?"

He punctuated the last sentence with a smiley face.

Before Hausner can be executed, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge must determine if he is competent to make the decision.

Related posts are in the competency, mental illness, and volunteer category indexes.

Volunteer is the term applied to inmates on death row who waive their appeals.

The Oregon Hearing

"Oregon death row inmate fighting reprieve," is the AP report, via the Las Vegas Sun.

An Oregon death row inmate and the state's governor are at the center of an unusual legal battle _ the governor has granted the twice-convicted murderer a reprieve, even though the inmate did not ask for it and does not want it.

Gov. John Kitzhaber blocked Gary Haugen's scheduled execution last fall, saying no executions would be carried out on his watch.

Haugen has sought to reject the governor's clemency. He's voluntarily waived legal appeals that could delay his execution for years and has fought to speed his punishment in protest of a criminal justice system that he says is broken.

Their dispute was heard in court on Tuesday.

Oregon voters reinstated the death penalty in 1984, and the state has executed two people since then. Both occurred while Kitzhaber served as governor between 1995 and 2003. Both inmates had volunteered for execution, waiving their appeals.

After Kitzhaber was again elected in 2010, he announced he wouldn't allow any more executions while he was in office, saying he was haunted by the previous two. The governor has said he has no sympathy for Haugen but opposes capital punishment and believes Oregon's death penalty laws are "compromised and inequitable."

Haugen's attorney argued in court on Tuesday that Kitzhaber's reprieve places an "onerous condition" on the death row inmate because it leaves Haugen in the dark about whether he will ever be granted his wish to be executed, since a different governor could take a different position.

"It could be a day, could be seven years," Harrison Latto said of the reprieve. "During that indefinite period of time, they're saying, `sit tight and we'll tell you at the end of that period whether you'll be executed or not."

And:

Kitzhaber's attorney, Tim Sylwester, said Haugen can only decline the reprieve if it comes with strings attached. He cited the case of a man who refused to admit guilt as a condition of a commuted sentence. In Haugen's case, Sylwester said no such conditions apply.

"He has a death sentence he can't challenge," Sylwester said. "Right now (with the reprieve) you're serving a life sentence, it's unconditional . so you can't refuse it."

The Oregonian reports, "Gary Haugen reprieve challenge: Judge appears receptive to death row inmate's argument."  It's by Helen Jung.

Gov. John Kitzhaber faces some obstacles in proving that his reprieve of Gary Haugen's planned execution is legally valid based on past Oregon Supreme Court cases, a judge said Tuesday.

Senior Judge Timothy Alexander quizzed a state attorney about the governor's argument that Haugen doesn't have to accept the reprieve for it to be effective.

Haugen, who has waived his appeals and volunteered for execution, is pushing for his execution to go forward.

Haugen's attorney, Harrison Latto, argued that in past cases before the state's highest court, Oregon has adopted an 1833 U.S. Supreme Court interpretation authored by Chief Justice John Marshall that suggests inmates must agree to pardons and similar acts for them to take effect.

The judge seemed receptive to the argument and asked if state Assistant Attorney General Tim Sylwester could point to any decisions showing that the Oregon Supreme Court had adopted an alternative view. Sylwester said he couldn't, noting the rarity of cases when someone rejects a pardon or reprieve.

"If the Oregon Supreme Court is still in favor of Justice Marshall's acceptance theory, then you've got a problem on (the governor's) side of the case," Alexander said.

Sylwester argued that past court decisions show pardon recipients must accept clemency only if it comes with conditions placed on them. The reprieve in Haugen's case doesn't carry any such conditions, he said. He also has maintained that the governor's power to grant reprieves has no constitutional limits and that the Circuit Court lacks authority to review the reasons for the reprieve.

"Haugen renews bid to reinstate death warrant,"  by Peter Wong in the Salem Statesman Journal.

Although he was barred Tuesday from speaking on his own behalf, Gary Haugen renewed his bid to reinstate his death warrant and reject a reprieve issued by Gov. John Kitzhaber.

Judge Timothy Alexander asked lawyers for Haugen and Kitzhaber to submit additional written arguments on one point relating to a 1957 decision of the Oregon Supreme Court that did not get considered earlier. He set no date for a decision, which he acknowledged likely is to be appealed.

When his lawyer requested that Haugen be allowed to make a statement at the end of an hourlong proceeding in Marion County Circuit Court, Alexander said no.

“This is a legal argument,” said Alexander, a senior judge from Washington County assigned to the case, who denied the request by Harrison Latto of Portland.

And:

Although there are 36 men and one woman on Oregon’s death row as of mid-2011, Haugen is the only one who has waived appeals.Haugen was within two weeks of his execution date when Kitzhaber issued a reprieve Nov. 22.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

A Hearing in Oregon

Today's Oregonian reports, "Inmate Gary Haugen wages legal challenge to Gov. Kitzhaber's execution reprieve."  It's by Helen Jung.

Death-row inmate Gary Haugen is to appear in court Tuesday morning to once again fight for his right to be executed.

He and his lawyer are expected to urge a judge to declare Gov. John Kitzhaber's reprieve of Haugen's execution, which had been planned for last December 6, invalid.

The challenge has been in the works ever since Kitzhaber announced last November that he would not allow Haugen --  or any other death-row inmate -- to be executed so long as he is governor. Kitzhaber noted his moral opposition to capital punishment and called for a statewide debate over the death penalty.

In court filings, Haugen's attorney Harrison Latto argues that Kitzhaber's reprieve is invalid because it does not meet the legal definition of a reprieve. Haugen has not accepted the reprieve, Latto argues, and it lasts for an indefinite amount of time.

And:

But the state attorney general's office insists in filings that the governor is well within his constitutional powers and that the court does not have the authority to review the reasons for the governor's reprieve.

The state counters that unconditional reprieves do not require acceptance by the recipient and that the time period is definite -- the duration of Kitzhaber's term as governor.

The hearing is set for 9:30 a.m. in Marion County Circuit Court. It continues more than a year of legal proceedings since Haugen first waived his legal appeals last May and agreed to be executed.

The AP filing is, "Oregon death row inmate fighting reprieve," via the Daily Astorian.

Haugen wants to proceed to the death sentence he was given five years ago after he was convicted of the 2003 killing of a fellow inmate. Haugen was serving a life sentence at the time for a 1981 murder.

Oregon has executed two people since voters reinstated the death penalty in 1984. Kitzhaber has said there would be no executions as long as he is governor.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

Delaware & Volunteers

"Should Delaware execute its death row 'volunteers'?" is the title of Jules Epstein's Wilmington News Journal OpEd.  He's an associate professor at Widener University School of Law.

The April execution of Shannon Johnson, a man who “volunteered” to give up all appellate rights and hasten his own death, was preceded by an examination of only two issues: was he “competent” [mentally capable] to give up those rights and did he do so as a matter of “free will?” Those are the tests articulated by courts nationally, and Mr. Johnson was deemed to meet them.

I write this article not to dispute that determination, although there are substantial questions about how it was arrived at, in particular whether Mr. Johnson’s lawyer should have stepped aside, as she was in the Catch-22 position of advising a client to waive his rights including the right to see if she had previously been ineffective.

Instead, I write to address the question that the hearing never examined, one that is critical if Delaware is to strive toward having a constitutionally sound death penalty process.

Coverage of last month's Delaware execution begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer index.

Delaware Volunteer Executed

"Delaware inmate executed after hours of legal battles," is the WHTT-FM Newsworks report by Mark Fowser.

After hours of court activity, a 28-year-old man has been put to death in Delaware for a man's shooting death in Wilmington six years ago.

Shannon Johnson had given up his appeals and was ready to die. However, the Federal Public Defender intervened in the case, and twice on Thursday obtained a stay of Johnson's execution. A federal appeals court had the final say, overturning a federal judge's decision to put the execution on hold in order to hear further arguments about Johnson's competency.

As the legal arguments were playing out, demonstrators showed their passions on both sides of the capital punishment issues as they carried picket signs outside the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center near Smyrna.

The Wilmington News Journal posts, "Johnson executed minutes before deadline."  It's written by Sean O'Sullivan, Esteban Parra, and James Fisher.

Condemned killer Shannon M. Johnson received his wish this morning, despite legal wrangling that appeared to halt his execution as a 3 a.m. deadline loomed.

State law mandates executions occur by lethal injection between 12:01 a.m. and 3 a.m. Johnson was pronounced dead at 2:55 a.m.

Ever since Johnson was found guilty in 2008 of the murder of Cameron Hamlin, he has told any attorney, court or jury that would listen to hurry up and put him to death.

Johnson's was the second execution in the nation this week, follwing an Ohio execution on Wednesday.  It was Delaware's first execution in 2012.  To date there have been 15 executions in America this year; a total of 1,292 post-Furman executions since 1977.

According to TDCJ, the next Texas execution is sceduled for April 26.  Five additional executions have already been scheduled for 2012.

From Delaware

Today's Wilmington News Journal reports, "Filing puts execution on hold."  It's written by Sean O'Sullivan.

A federal judge on Wednesday indefinitely delayed Friday's scheduled execution of convicted killer Shannon M. Johnson, saying he needed more time to "digest" a massive legal filing by the Delaware Federal Public Defender's Office, which is seeking to stop the lethal injection.

Johnson, 28, waived all his remaining appeals to speed his execution and was declared competent to waive those legal rights by Superior Court Judge M. Jane Brady last month.

However, federal defenders acting on behalf of Johnson's sister, Lakeisha Ford, argue that Johnson is not competent due to mental illness and substandard intelligence and a state court competency review was flawed.

Johnson was convicted in 2008 of the murder of 25-year-old Cameron Hamlin. Hamlin's father, Vandrick, was in the courtroom Wednesday and seemed taken aback by the turn of events.

Afterward, he was briefly speechless before saying that he was disappointed by U.S. District Chief Judge Gregory M. Sleet's ruling to stay Johnson's execution.

State prosecutors and Johnson's court-appointed attorney, Jennifer-Kate Aaronson, also seemed stunned by the ruling and objected to the delay. Deputy Attorney General Paul Wallace described the lengthy brief filed by public defenders on Friday -- six days before the execution -- as a ploy designed "to ensure they get a stay."

"It is Mr. Johnson's view that he has been accorded all constitutional due process," Aaronson told Sleet.

Wallace told Sleet that the state would appeal the issue to the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

Earlier coverage of the case begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer index.

A Delaware Volunteer

"Delay of killer's execution sought," is the title of Sean O'Sullivan's report for the Wilmington News Journal.  Here's the beginning:

The Delaware Federal Public Defender's Office is seeking to stop the execution early Friday of convicted killer Shannon Johnson, who last month waived all of his appeals in order to speed his lethal injection sentence.

This is at least the third time federal defenders have tried to force their way into the case and represent Johnson, despite the fact that Johnson already has court-appointed counsel and has stated repeatedly that he does not want the assistance of federal defenders and does not want his execution delayed.

In the 88-page brief filed in U.S. District Court late Friday, Chief of the Capital Habeas Unit Julie Brain argues that despite a lengthy competency hearing in Delaware Superior Court this fall, Johnson is not competent to waive his appeals and is ineligible for the death penalty.

Brain argues that her office has authority to step in and force a delay in Johnson's execution because it is now acting on behalf of Johnson's sister, Lakeisha Ford.

Johnson's attorney, Jennifer-Kate Aaronson, said Saturday that she has received notice of the federal defender's civil action and said her client expected that "an estranged family member would file a petition against his wishes, at the expense of taxpayers."

"Mr. Johnson remains committed to waiving all appeals and hopes his execution proceeds as scheduled in a few days," she said, adding she is preparing a response to the petition on Johnson's behalf.

Officials with the Delaware Attorney General's office could not be reached for comment.

Though Johnson has been deemed competent on several occasions, and has appeared lucid and articulate in his appearances in court, federal defenders wrote that Johnson "suffers from a debilitating combination of mental disorders, including mental illness and severe brain damage."

Related posts are in the volunteer index.

Ohio Editorial & News Roundup

"Flaws in law, judicial questions and costs of capital cases reinforce the moral imperative to end capital punishment," is the Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial.

A federal judge has opened the door for Ohio to resume executions. That doesn't mean the state has to -- or should -- begin executing prisoners again.

In fact, this would be the ideal time for Ohio to repeal its capital punishment statute, as this page long has advocated.

One of the Ohio law's authors, current state Supreme Court Justice Paul Pfeifer, has become a very public critic of how the death penalty is applied.

Others who have expressed reservations about capital punishment include former state prisons director Terry Collins, who oversaw 33 executions, and former Ohio Attorney General James Petro, who helped Pfeifer draft the statute when they were in the General Assembly and who has co-authored a book about wrongful convictions. Petro, for one, is not yet ready to say that Ohio should abolish the death penalty.

And:

Ohio's conduct of executions has faced sharp scrutiny since 2009, when executioners tried for almost two hours to insert a needle into the veins of Romell Broom before then-Gov. Ted Strickland halted the proceedings. Broom remains on death row.

Prison is where Broom belongs until natural death claims him. Wiles, too. This is no defense of the horrors they committed. But taking their lives in the name of justice is wrong.

The AP posts, "Condemned Ohio inmate won't appeal execution," by Andrew Welsh-Huggins, via the Newark Advocate.

A condemned inmate scheduled to die next week for killing a teenager during a 1985 farmhouse robbery has decided not to appeal a judge's order allowing the execution, his attorney said Friday.

If put to death, 49-year-old Mark Wiles would be the first inmate executed in Ohio in six months following legal fights over the state's lethal injection policies.

Wiles attorney Allen Bohnert told The Associated Press that Wiles was not appealing but declined to say why or comment further.

Wiles' decision came two days after Gov. John Kasich refused to spare him, a decision that upheld the Ohio Parole Board's ruling to deny Wiles clemency.

And:

Attorneys who have represented Wiles before the Ohio Parole Board called the state's clemency system arbitrary and unpredictable and said Wiles was not the "worst of the worst" for whom capital punishment was designed.

The Youngstown Vindicator editorial is, "Get executions back on track for Portage, Trumbull killers."

Two noteworthy developments this week in Connecticut and Ohio reinforce the highly contentious debate over the death penalty.

In Connecticut, the state Legislature approved an outright abolition of capital punishment, making The Constitution State the 17th in the nation to outlaw the death penalty. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich denied clemency for a Portage County murderer after a federal judge ended a five-month moratorium on executions over legal complaints that Ohio had not followed its own lethal-injection protocol properly.

In Connecticut, we recognize the abolition of capital punishment as a predictable outcome for that region: Only one state in the entire Northeast — New Hampshire — continues to respect the logic behind the death penalty and keeps it on the books.

In Ohio, we welcome the developments as a sign that the state has learned from its past transgressions in the use of lethal injection and as a harbinger that this state will continue to maintain the death penalty for the worst of the worst of cold-blooded murderers.

Earlier coverage from Ohio begins at the link.

Connecticut OpEds

"Life Sentence Guards Against Fatal Mistakes," is Stephen Saloom's Hartford Courant OpEd.  It appeared in the Sunday edition.  Saloom is the Policy Director at the Innocence Project.

The General Assembly's current debate on whether to abolish the death penalty in Connecticut has touched on all the important concerns, and there seems to be agreement on one key point — no one can tolerate the execution of an innocent person at the hands of the government.

For many, that risk might seem implausible, inconceivable or even incredible. Yet we know from the 289 wrongful convictions overturned nationally by DNA evidence (17 involving people who were on death row) that the possibility of executing an innocent person inevitably exists whenever the death penalty exists. This is true even in a state such as Connecticut.

It is well known that wrongful convictions have occurred in Connecticut, in part because of the three men whose innocence was proven in recent years by post-conviction DNA testing. What is chilling is that, if DNA evidence had not been available in their cases, these men would still be in prison for crimes they didn't commit. And, frankly, nobody would have realized the injustice.

Unfortunately, that's the reality in the vast majority of cases. The best estimates are that DNA evidence provides proof in roughly 10 percent of murder cases. Most serious cases typically rely on less reliable forms of proof, such as eyewitness identification, non-DNA forensic evidence, confessions and informant testimony.

The Day carries "Ending a death penalty the state is reluctant to use," by Dick Ahles, a retired journalist.

As Connecticut's non-fatal death penalty works its way toward possible abolition by the General Assembly, it is often noted that the state has executed only two men since 1960 and the last one, Michael Ross, volunteered. But the other one, Joseph Taborsky, volunteered too.

Ross refused to seek additional appeals in 2005 after 18 years on death row, saying he didn't want to inflict any more anguish on the survivors of his eight victims. Taborsky, the so-called "mad dog killer," waived his right to appeal right after his sentencing in 1957 for six armed robbery killings and was executed three years later.

This means the last person put to death in Connecticut after exhausting his appeals was a killer named Frank Wojulewicz, who died in the electric chair in 1959 after eight years of trying to overturn his sentence.

And:

The death penalty faces only partial abolition this year because the bill under consideration does not include the 11 men currently on death row. This would allow legislators to avoid criticism for sparing, in theory, the killers of the family of Dr. William Petit. Some of the others have been awaiting execution for a decade or two and the likelihood of any of the 11 being lethally injected at any time is slight

Repeal easily passed in the Judiciary Committee last month and awaits a Senate vote, where the result depends on three undecided Democrats. The House strongly favors abolition.

If two of the three senators vote for repeal or if the vote is tied and Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman breaks it in favor of repeal, the bill will be signed by the governor and only the 11 grandfathered residents of death row will face the unlikely prospect of death by lethal injection.

Earlier coverage from Connecticut begins at the link.

Georgia Execution Stayed; Volunteer Opts to Pursue Appeal

Today's Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports, "Execution halted for condemned Paulding County killer."  It's by Bill Rankin.

After refusing for years to challenge his execution, condemned killer Nicholas Cody Tate on Tuesday changed his mind just hours before he was to be put to death.

And:

After the Georgia Supreme Court upheld the death sentence in Tate's automatic direct appeal, which is required in all capital cases, Tate said he wished to file no further appeal, which are routine in most all death-penalty cases and, on occasion, result in new trials.

During one hearing, Tate told a judge he had been caught "red handed" and that none of his rights had been violated. "I choose to waive any and all future appeals," Tate said.

Last week, as the execution neared, Tate's brother sought to file an appeal on Tate's behalf. But that was abandoned after psychiatrists examined Tate and found he was competent to decide on his own to forgo his final appeals.

"Judge Postpones Execution," is the AP report, via Georgia Public Broadcasting.

A judge halted the execution of a Georgia man less than an hour before he was set to die for the 2001 murders of a woman and her 3-year-old daughter, acting after the inmate signaled he would file a new round of appeals.

Butts County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wilson postponed Nicholas Cody Tate's execution until further notice about 45 minutes before Tate was scheduled to receive a lethal injection at the state prison in Jackson on Tuesday evening for the murders of Chrissie Williams and her daughter Katelyn. It's unclear how long his execution would be delayed, but it often takes this type of appeal years to work through the court system.

Reuters posts, "Judge halts Georgia execution of man who killed woman, child," by David Beasley.

Tate, who had been scheduled to die on his birthday, declined a special last meal. He would have been the 35th person Georgia has executed by lethal injection.

Tate's execution would also have been the third in the United States this year, following Rodrigo Hernandez in Texas and Gary Welch in Oklahoma, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Last year, 43 people were executed.

Thirty-four U.S. states currently have the death penalty, the center said.

Earlier coverage of the Tate case begins at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer index.

The Georgia Volunteer

Greg Bluestein posts, "Georgia judge turns down attempt by death row inmate's brother to appeal on his behalf," for AP.  It's via the Republic.

A Georgia judge on Thursday rejected an appeal by a death row inmate's brother that would postpone the condemned man's scheduled execution next week.

The order, signed by Butts County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wilson, clears the way for Nicholas Cody Tate to be executed on Tuesday for the 2001 murders of a Dallas, Ga., woman and her 3-year-old daughter.

Death penalty cases typically take well over a decade to work through the appeals process, but Tate has refused to challenge his conviction and death sentence through habeas corpus appeals. His brother, Dustin Wade Tate, sought to file an appeal on his behalf but Thursday's order concludes he wasn't able to prove the inmate was "incompetent."

The inmate's current and former attorneys won't comment on why Tate, who is 31, won't let them file the appeal, although a transcript from a 2009 hearing highlights his thoughts on the process.

And:

Nicholas Tate pleaded guilty to murder charges in November 2005 and was sentenced to death a month later. His brothers also admitted to committing the violence. They are serving life sentences in prison, and Dustin Wade Tate sent the appeal this month on his behalf.

Nicholas Tate filed a motion for a new trial in 2006, but three years later he had a change of heart. That's when he said he wanted to waive all future appeals, and a trial judge accepted his request, noting that he was coherent and articulate.

His attorneys went ahead with a direct appeal, asking the Georgia Supreme Court to overturn the sentence.

Earlier coverage of Tate's execution date is at the link.  Related posts are in the volunteer index.

An Update From Georgia

"Condemned inmate's brother files appeals," is the title of Bill Rankin's Atlanta Journal-Constitution report.

The brother of Paulding County killer Nicholas Cody Tate is asking state and federal judges to allow him to pursue appeals on his condemned brother's behalf.

Tate, convicted of killing Chrissie Williams and her 3-year-old daughter Katelyn in 2001,  is set to be executed by lethal injection at 7 p.m. on Jan. 31.

In November 2005, Tate pleaded guilty to the crimes, waived a trial by jury and was sentenced to death by a Paulding judge after a sentencing hearing. Tate has since exhausted his automatic appeals, but he has yet to file his habeas corpus appeals, which are routine in capital cases.

This week, Tate's younger brother, Dustin Wade Tate, who was a co-defendant in the case and serving a life sentence for the crimes, has filed motions in state and federal court to litigate final appeals on his brother's behalf.

According to court filings, if a death-row inmate declines to pursue available appeals due to a mental disease or defect, another person who has a significant relationship with the condemned inmate can pursue them on his behalf. The filings cite an affidavits from mental health experts who say Nicholas Cody Tate was severely abused during his childhood and likely suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder.

The state Attorney General's Office is asking for these filings to be dismissed.

Earlier coverage of Tate's case is at the link. Related posts are in the volunteer index.

Georgia Roundup

"Georgia Supreme Court chief urges lawmakers to fund new clerk for death penalty cases," is an AP report via the Republic.

The Georgia Supreme Court is asking state lawmakers to fund a new clerk who would only work capital cases.

Chief Justice Carol Hunstein on Wednesday urged lawmakers to approve the request for about $80,000 to hire a new capital case docket clerk for those cases.

She said "I don't think anyone outside the judiciary understands how complicated and complex these cases are."

Georgia executed four people in 2011, including Troy Davis, whose claims of innocence attracted international attention.

There is also news of an execution date set for a volunteer, an inmate who has waived his appeals.  "Ga. death row inmate refuses to file habeas appeal," is by AP writer Greg Bluestein.  It's via the Rockdale Citizen.

Nicholas Cody Tate could delay his execution at the end of this month for years if he filed a new round of appeals. But his refusal to do so has made his death sentence for the murders of two people one of the fastest-moving in recent memory in Georgia.

In the glacial-paced world of death penalty law, Tate’s death sentence for the 2001 killings of a woman and her 3-year-old daughter moved through the appeals process quickly. That’s because he refused to challenge his conviction and sentence by filing a habeas appeal in state or federal court.

His current and former attorneys won’t comment on why Tate, who is 31, won’t let them file the appeal. But the transcript from a 2009 court hearing helps illuminate his thoughts on the process.

“You caught me red-handed,” he said during the hearing, when he waived his motion for a new trial. “None of my rights were violated ... I choose to waive any and all future appeals.”

A Paulding County judge last week cleared the way for his execution, and state officials on Tuesday scheduled the lethal injection for Jan. 31 at 7 p.m. Death penalty opponents say Tate’s case highlights the problems with capital punishment.

“The appeals process exists as a safeguard to protect the integrity of the judicial process,” said Kathryn Hamoudah, who chairs Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. “Proceeding without is tantamount to allowing state assisted suicide.”

"Tate execution set for Jan. 31," is an AP brief, also via the Rockdale Citizen.

The Georgia Department of Corrections has set a Jan. 31 execution date for Nicholas Cody Tate, who killed a Paulding County woman and her daughter in 2001.

Tate is to be put to death by lethal injection at 7:00 p.m. at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson.

And:

Tate pleaded guilty to the murders in 2005 and waived a trial by jury. After a sentencing hearing, the trial judge sentenced Tate to death. Tate's case is highly unusual in that he has not challenged his conviction and sentence through a petition of habeas corpus in either state or federal court.

Related posts are in the judiciary and volunteer indexes.

The Oregon Moratorium - Additional Commentary & Coverage

 "Oregon's death penalty halt merciful and right," is the title of Mark Osler's post at CNN.  Mark Osler is a University of St. Thomas Law prof and a former federal prosecutor.  He's also the author of Jesus on Death Row, written while he taught at Baylor Law.

Oregon and other states have incorporated executive clemency into their systems of criminal law, drawing on the example laid out in the United States Constitution. The framers of the Constitution chose intentionally to give the executive that power, knowing full well that it would necessarily run contrary to popular will.

If you are angry with Kitzhaber for using that power, also direct your anger at Alexander Hamilton, who was a driving force behind the institution of executive clemency in the United States. Here is part of what Hamilton said about it in Federalist Paper 74: "Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. ... On these accounts, one man appears to be a more eligible dispenser of the mercy of government, than a body of men."

And:

A second buried truth is revealed within the tortured way in which Kitzhaber announced his decision. During a prior term as governor, in 1997, he had allowed two executions, and it seems clear that he was deeply troubled by his role in those killings. How could he not be? It is a heavy responsibility to participate in a deliberative process that identifies a citizen to be put to death by the state. However, Kitzhaber is just the exposed tip of an iceberg of human emotion. Beneath him are thousands of others who have been forced by the institution of capital punishment to live with their role in an intentional death.

Among that group are lawyers, witnesses and judges, but perhaps most sympathetic of all are the jurors. They are plucked from their daily lives by the government and suddenly thrust into the most important role of all -- they must vote, unanimously, after deliberation, on whether someone will live or die. If they vote for execution, they must file back into that hushed, tense room, look that person in the eye and say in the most public of ways that they have chosen him to die.

I have known some of those jurors. Years later, even if they were convinced they were right, they revealed deep and dark emotions related to what they had done. At best, that service was seen as a difficult but worthwhile sacrifice, and at worst as a moment they too often relived while filled with doubt.

Kitzhaber is right to say that the capital process is fatally flawed. It is unfair to some defendants, yes. But a system that tries many, condemns some to die and executes few is also cruel and unusual to those who work within the process. It is primarily inflicting pain on victims' relatives who wait in limbo, on jurors who relive those discussions, on prosecutors whose hearts are hardened while their efforts are frustrated and on the budgets and reputations of the states that choose to go on with it anyway.

Diann Rust-Tierney posts, "Leadership," at Huffington Post.  She's executive director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty."

Yesterday, Governor John Kitzhaber imposed a moratorium on executions in Oregon.

He did not, as much as I might like to see it, end the death penalty.

Faced with deciding whether to allow the execution of Gary Haugen on December 6th, he did the right thing. He was honest with the public about his doubts about Oregon's death penalty and he acted on his convictions.

The governor admitted he had tried it the other way. He had allowed the executions of two other men in 1996 and 1997. But those decisions haunted him and I submit, further tainted the outcome because he acted against his better judgment.

And:

In the best tradition of leadership, Governor Kitzhaber has articulated a vision of a criminal justice system that is fair, reliable and accountable. More importantly, in the tradition of great leaders he has empowered the people of Oregon to engage in a principled and reasoned dialogue about how best to reach that collective vision.

At the Oregonian, associate editor David Sarasohn writes, "On voluntary execution, Kitzhaber won't sign on."

John Kitzhaber has a perspective on capital punishment that nobody else around quite has. He's the only Oregon governor in 50 years -- and the only one alive -- with his signature on execution orders.

Signing them has stayed with him.

"They were the most agonizing and difficult decisions I have made as governor and I have revisited and questioned them over and over again during the past 14 years," he said Tuesday, explaining why he was refusing to approve the execution of Gary Haugen. "... And I simply cannot participate once again in something I believe to be morally wrong."

The prospect of being hanged, noted the 18th-century English writer Samuel Johnson, concentrates the mind wonderfully.

Apparently, so does the prospect of signing the order for the hanging.

It can be an agonizing responsibility for governors. Other politicians can pound their chests about the rightness of the death penalty, but there's just one name on the order.

And:

George Ryan, commuting every death sentence in Illinois, called the state's system "arbitrary and capricious." Oregon's system may not have the beaten confessions, incompetent defenses and racial sentencing patterns of Illinois -- or Texas, despite Austin's statehouse satisfaction -- but it's clearly arbitrary in its own very Oregon way.

And the arbitrariness may be inescapable.

"The basic question -- does the system accurately and consistently determine which defendants 'deserve' to die? -- cannot be answered in the affirmative," concluded Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun in 1994, abandoning any effort to provide judicial guidelines for executions. "From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death."

And if you're John Kitzhaber, you won't sign your name to it.

Also at the Oregonian, columnist Steve Duin writes, "Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber's vote is the only one that counts."

In two dramatic moves — curiously timed for Thanksgiving week — Gov. John Kitzhaber has firmly established the pecking order in Oregon politics.

And:

There’s only one sheriff in town. John Kitzhaber took last November’s election, for good reason, as the only vote he needed to act decisively on his prescription for what ails us.

He’s not asking for second opinions. His morality is law. And 1,142 days remain in his four-year term.

"Capital punishment slowly loses ground in US," is the AFP post by Chantal Valery.  It's datelined Washington, DC.

With a new moratorium on the death penalty in Oregon and a drop in the number of death sentences and executions, capital punishment is slowly losing ground in the United States.

Oregon governor John Fitzhaber announced on Tuesday that the northwestern state will halt executions at least until the end of his mandate, joining the camp of US states that have effectively shunned the death penalty.

"I refuse to be a part of this compromised and inequitable system any longer; and I will not allow further executions while I am governor," said Fitzhaber, who said he had come to the conclusion they were "morally wrong."

The governor suspended the last execution scheduled for this year, halting the count for the number of people put to death in the United States in 2011 at 43.

That total is slightly below that seen last year, and less than half the number of people executed each year in the 1990s. The number of death sentences also has fallen since then by nearly a third.

Only a dozen of the 50 US states conducted executions last year, most of them in the south.

"Slowly, state by state, there is this erosion of support for the death penalty," Richard Dieter, the director of the Death Penalty Information Center, told AFP.

In all, 16 states have abolished the death penalty or did not re-adopt it after it was restored by the US Supreme Court in 1976. They could be joined as early as next year not only by Oregon, but also by Maryland, Connecticut and California.

"Debate on death penalty revives," is a lengthy article by Alan Gustafson from the Sunday edition of the Salem Statesman Journal, in Oregon.

Questions and uncertainty about the long-term fate of Oregon's death penalty loom in the wake of Gov. John Kitzhaber's controversial decision, announced on Tuesday, to block the scheduled Dec. 6 execution of twice-convicted murderer Gary Haugen, and to ban all executions for the remainder of his term.

The Democratic governor said he has long regretted allowing Oregon's two most recent executions — those of serial killer Douglas Wright in 1996 and Salem double killer Harry Moore in 1997.

"I do not believe those executions made us safer," Kitzhaber said. "Certainly I don't believe they made us nobler as a society. And I simply cannot participate once again in something I believe to be morally wrong."

The Los Angeles Times reports, "Death row inmates' desire to die renews debate," by By Carol J. Williams.

Serial wife-killer Jerry Stanley wants to die.

Imprisoned on death row for the past 28 years, Stanley insists he deserves execution for the cold-blooded killing of his fourth wife in 1980 and for shooting to death his second wife five years earlier in front of their two children.

One of 718 prisoners on California's death row, Stanley has renewed an ethical debate among legal experts about whether a condemned prisoner who drops resistance to execution has been driven insane by his confinement or has accepted his fate and should be allowed a dignified end.

An Alameda County judge has ruled that Stanley is competent to decide his own legal matters. He is one of at least three condemned men on the nation's death rows volunteering to expedite their sentences. Gary Haugen, an Oregon man convicted of killing his former girlfriend's mother in 1980, and a fellow inmate in 2003, was ruled competent in September and faced a Dec. 6 death by lethal injection until Gov. John Kitzhaber just days ago banned further executions during his term. The third, Eric Robert, killed a guard at his South Dakota prison in April while serving an 80-year sentence for kidnapping. He has vowed to kill again until his death wish is granted.

Since the modern era of capital punishment began with the 1977 execution of Gary Gilmore in Utah, civil rights advocates and death penalty supporters have debated whether a state would run afoul of laws prohibiting execution of the mentally ill if they bow to a condemned inmate's suicidal impulse.

"Most of these people aren't dropping their appeals because they believe it's the punishment they deserve," said John Blume, a Cornell University law professor and author of "Killing the Willing," a 2005 study of those who abandon pursuit of reprieve.

And:

Sean O'Brien, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who has worked with death row volunteers for 30 years, calls the pursuit of execution "suicide by court."

"Over the course of time there are many who say 'I'd rather die than remain here,' " O'Brien said. He notes that volunteers "can be very persuasive, even if they are seriously mentally ill. A person intent on killing himself can figure out how to get the job done. They know what to say."

Death penalty supporters see nothing wrong with that and urge states to honor the volunteers' wishes.

"Oregon Governor Bans The Death Penalty," by Greg Howard at Slate.

Kitzhaber said his "heart goes out" to the families of Haugen’s victims, but the three-term governor said he has long regretted allowing two men to be executed in 1996 and 1997. The two inmates, like Haugen, had also waived their appeals. And although Kitzhaber did not stop their executions, the governor was once an emergency room doctor, and said his opposition to the death penalty was connected to his oath as a physician to "do no harm." Kitzhaber said Oregon voters didn’t reinstate the death penalty in 1984 to only put to death inmates who volunteer.

"The reality is that, in Oregon, our death sentence is essentially an extremely expensive life prison term," Kitzhaber said. "Far more expensive than the terms of others who are sentenced to life in prison without parole, rather than to death row."

Earlier coverage of Oregon's moratorium begins with the preceding post.

Oregon Execution Date Set

The Oregonian reports, "Behind execution of Gary Haugen, controversy swirls around the drugs used and who administers them."  It's written by Joe Rojas-Burke.

Executions by lethal injection are supposed to be quick, painless and more humane than the gas chamber or gallows.

The condemned rests on a hospital gurney. Technicians attach heart monitors and place intravenous lines, usually in each arm. When the time comes, an executioner in another room pushes the plunger on a syringe connected to the IV line, delivering a barbiturate anesthetic to induce a coma within seconds. Two more injections quickly follow: pancuronium bromide to stop breathing and potassium chloride to arrest the heart.

Oregon, preparing to execute convicted murderer Gary Haugen on Dec. 6, uses this three-drug lethal injection, as do nearly all of the 34 death penalty states. But the killing method remains controversial. Critics say poor understanding of the drugs' effects and executioners' lack of medical training has led to botched cases and a likelihood of extreme suffering in some instances.

"A firing squad probably causes less pain and suffering," says Dr. Jonathan Groner, a pediatric surgeon in Columbus, Ohio, and outspoken critic of medicalized executions. "Lethal injection looks like outpatient surgery, so people are willing to allow it."

But Dr. David Dershowitz, an anesthesiologist in Worcester, Mass., who has served as an expert witness for states imposing the death penalty, says the initial dose of anesthetic should reliably obliterate all sensation and perception of pain. Controversy persists because independent researchers aren't allowed to see detailed records of executions, says Dr. David Waisel, an anesthesiologist and medical ethicist at Boston Children's Hospital.

"Departments of corrections hide their data, so we have no idea how often problems occur, or what kinds of problems occur," says Waisel, who has testified as an expert witness for defendants facing the death penalty.

"I suspect that if lethal injection was done well, it would be painless. If it's done poorly it's very, very inhumane."

Death penalty opponents, including Amnesty International and the ACLU of Oregon, petitioned Gov. John Kitzhaber to halt executions in Oregon until the state completes a review of the effectiveness of the three-drug method. Corrections Department officials and the governor have declined to comment on the petition.

"Prison superintendent outlines plans for death row inmate Gary Haugen's final hours," by Helen Jung is also in the Oregonian.

If all goes as planned on Dec. 6, Oregon State Penitentiary Superintendent Jeff Premo will place his hand on the shoulder of death row inmate Gary Haugen and say his name three times after an executioner injects the twice-convicted killer with an anesthetic.

If Haugen does not respond, Premo will then brush his finger across the prisoner's eyelashes, looking for any reflexive flicker.

And if Haugen still does not respond, only then will Premo give the go-ahead for the executioner to administer two more drugs that will paralyze the 49-year-old inmate and stop his heart. Haugen, who has waived legal challenges to his conviction and death sentence, would become the first person executed by the state in 14 years.

Preparing for the execution has been "the most challenging thing I've done in my life," Premo said Friday.

He declined to share his personal feelings about the death penalty or about Haugen, but noted that he started working at the prison in March 1981 -- just eight months before Haugen was admitted -- and said the two have developed "a very good rapport" in the 30 years they have known each other.

In a briefing with reporters and photographers, Premo outlined in detail how the penitentiary will carry out the lethal injection so it is "professional" and "humane." Media members also toured the execution room and the cell where Haugen will spend his last 48 hours.

Premo and his staff have spent more than a year researching what other states do, consulting with lawyers and talking with medical professionals about how to update the state's procedures, he said. Premo himself traveled to Texas to witness an execution.

The results have ushered in some changes, such as the plan for Premo to personally verify that Haugen lapses into unconsciousness from the first drug -- pentobarbital -- before he allows the executioner to administer the next two drugs.

The AP report, "Judge orders Haugen execution," by Jonathan Cooper is via the Eugene Register-Guard.

Gary Haugen will spend the last 48 hours of his life in a small cell just a few steps from the gurney where he’ll be executed for fatally stabbing and bludgeoning a fellow inmate.

Shortly after dusk, eight corrections officers will take him on the 12-foot journey to an execution chamber that hasn’t been used in more than a decade. They’ll stretch leather straps across his arms, legs and chest before medical professionals insert IV catheters to carry lethal doses of medication into each wrist.

A Marion County Circuit Court judge signed a death warrant Friday ordering Ore­gon’s first execution in 14 years. Haugen is scheduled to die by lethal injection on Dec. 6. The 49-year-old inmate has disregarded advice from his lawyers and waived his remaining appeals.

Department of Corrections officials briefed reporters Friday on the lethal injection process and their yearlong preparations for Oregon’s first execution in 14 years.

“Carrying out the execution is a serious and solemn matter,” said Mike Gower, assistant director of operations for the Corrections Department.

Corrections officials say they’ve been preparing for more than a year for Haugen’s execution. Oregon State Penitentiary Superintendent Jeff Premo traveled to Texas and Oklahoma to observe preparations, and he oversaw two recent practice runs in Oregon. Preparations have cost $42,000 so far, excluding legal costs, he said.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

From Oregon

Oregon Public Radio stateion KUOW-FM reports, "Retiring Corrections Director Regrets Having To Oversee Execution."  It's by Chris Lehman.

The outgoing director of the Oregon Department of Corrections says he wishes he didn't have to oversee an execution during his final month on the job. Max Williams plans to leave the position at the end of December, a few weeks after Oregon's first scheduled execution in more than a decade.

Williams was appointed head of Oregon's prison system in 2004. During his nearly eight years on the job the inmate population expanded rapidly thanks in part to Oregon's mandatory sentencing laws.

He's taking a job as head of the Oregon Community Foundation, a non-profit charity. But before he leaves the Department of Corrections, Williams is scheduled to supervise what would be Oregon's first execution since 1997.

Two-time killer Gary Haugen has dropped his appeals and is slated to die by lethal injection on December 6th. Williams says he hoped he wouldn't have to oversee an execution as Corrections director.

"At the same time, when you take the oath to support both the Constitution and the laws of the state, you understand that that comes with the job and that's part of your ultimate responsibility," he says.

"Director of corrections resigns post," provides a broader profile of Williams in Alan Gustafson's Statesman Journal report.

The leader of Oregon's prison system is stepping down at the end of the year to become president of a nonprofit foundation, prompting Gov. John Kitzhaber to conduct a fast-track search for a new corrections chief.

"We are evaluating our options in terms of a national search," Kitzhaber spokesman Tim Raphael said Tuesday about finding a replacement for Max Williams, the outgoing director of the state Corrections Department.

The governor also will consider candidates from within the ranks of Oregon's 4,300-employee corrections agency, he said.

And:

Williams, 48, a former three-term Republican legislator, has led the Corrections Department for almost eight years. Then-Gov. Ted Kulongoski named him to the post in 2004.

Earlier news of corrections officials begins at the link.

Oregon to Change Execution Time

Today's Oregonian reports, "Instead of a midnight execution, state plans 7 p.m. death for Gary Haugen."  It's by Helen Jung.

When the state executed Harry Charles Moore in 1997, it chose the eeriest of hours -- just after midnight -- to deliver the lethal combination of drugs to the double murderer. 

But if the state executes inmate Gary Haugen on Dec. 6 as planned, the procedure would unfold around 7 p.m.

The timing would help the state Corrections Department coordinate security with other public safety agencies, reduce the impact on employee schedules and limit disruptions to the inmates, said spokeswoman Jeanine Hohn.

The switch is one that several states across the country have made in recent years, trading out the midnight execution times for daytime or evening hours, said John Bessler, an associate law professor at the University of Baltimore and author of Death in the Dark: Midnight Executions in America.

In some cases, the tradition goes as far back as the 1880s, he said, as states sought to crack down on the "carnival-like atmosphere" that accompanied hangings in the public square.

By bringing the executions inside prison grounds and moving the times to the dead of night, officials were able to limit attendance -- and media attention -- to the executions, he said.

Earlier coverage from Oregon begins at the link.

More From Pennsylvania

Today's Philadelphia Inquirer carries the editorial, "Income shouldn't decide the quality of justice."

What defendant on trial for his life would willingly turn to a divorce lawyer with no experience in death-penalty cases?

Or to an attorney who had prepped for all of 15 minutes?

Or a Bible-quoting counsel who rattled off the one verse that, whoops, convinced jurors to hand down a death sentence?

As it turns out, dozens of people on trial for murder in Pennsylvania have had to rely on such ill-prepared, inept, and incompetent court-appointed counsel provided when defendants couldn't afford an attorney.

These are attorneys who - mostly because they're paid a pittance to prepare a complex death-penalty defense - prove to be well short of the task. The problem has been long-known, but it's finally gotten the full attention of the state's highest court.

In September, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court named a veteran Philadelphia judge, Benjamin Lerner, to investigate the compelling accusation of a Philadelphia-based death-penalty defense group that the courts are scrimping on justice by shortchanging the poor in capital cases.

That's a welcome and overdue step by the Supreme Court - a point driven home even more by an Inquirer review of death-penalty cases published Sunday.

In nearly one out of every three capital convictions stretching back over three decades, the courts have reversed or sent cases back for new hearings due to inadequate representation.

With so many botched legal defenses, no Pennsylvanian can be assured that the state's system of capital punishment is being administered fairly.

The Inquirer's news report on problems with Pennsylvania Capital Cases is noted at the link.

Today's Harrisburg News Patriot also features a lengthy news article, "How much is Pennsylvania's death penalty costing taxpayers?"  It's written by Sara Ganim.

Since it was reinstated in 1978, only three people on death row in Pennsylvania have actually died by lethal injection, and those three defendants basically signed their own death warrants by waiving their rights to appeal.
    
A much higher number, about 140 people, have been released from death row following successful appeals.
    
Some were found to be innocent. Most simply had their sentences commuted to life in prison. But in the meantime, taxpayers were footing the bill for their lengthy appeals, and by lengthy, we’re talking decades.
    
State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, a former prosecutor from Montgomery County and the chairman of the state Senate Judiciary Committee, has commissioned a bipartisan task force to take a look at what this bottleneck has cost taxpayers over the last 40 years. Right now, there are no estimates.
    
The task force will also explore whether the death penalty is worth keeping. Gov. Tom Corbett’s office has no position on the Greenleaf’s resolution.

And:

But if anyone has come close to compiling numbers that give a big-picture perspective, it’s Robert Dunham.
    
He’s a Harrisburg-based assistant federal defender, who began researching the results of cases by hand when he was director of the Death Penalty Resource Center in the 1990s.
    
People on both sides of this issue agree that he has the most accurate statistics on Pennsylvania death penalty cases.
    
His recordings show that 237 people have had their death penalty sentence overturned since 1978, but because he didn’t start researching them until the 1990s and the state keeps no records of these cases, he said it’s unclear what happened to about 75 of those defendants. He does know that about 15 defendants were sent back death row and are still there.
    
About 123 were resentenced to spend life in prison.
    
At least 12 people resentenced to less than life.
    
There were six complete exonerations — Nicholas Yarris and Harold Wilson, Jay Smith, William Nieves, Neil Ferber and Thomas Kimbell.
    
Another, Fred Thomas, got a new trial and died waiting for it.
    
Those results make Dunham believe that often the simple answer to Pennsylvania’s problem is that there is too little funding for poor defendants.
    
In many other states, when an inmate on death row exhausts appeals and the governor signs the death warrant, he or she is executed.
    
In Pennsylvania, the end of that same road is a new sentencing — sometimes an entirely new trial — and Dunham said many times it’s because it’s very common for public defenders on death penalty cases to be so underfunded that their defense is inadequate by the standards of the law.
    
Instead of paying for a better defense up front, Pennsylvanians are paying the price of years of appeals, hearings and re-investigations that often don’t even lead to death by lethal injection, Dunham said.
    
Former state Attorney General Ernie Preate said he witnessed that when he was a prosecutor.

Related posts are in the indigent defense index.

Rare Oregon Execution Date Prompts Debate

The Salem Statesman Journal begins a series of artices with, "Haugen's execution date set," all by Alan Gustafson.

A Marion County judge on Friday cleared the way for the execution of Oregon death row inmate Gary Haugen, deeming him mentally competent to drop his appeals and legally sane to be put to death.

Lethal-injection execution of the 49-year-old twice-convicted murderer tentatively is scheduled for 7 p.m. Dec. 6 at the Oregon State Penitentiary in Salem.

If carried through, the execution will be the state's first in 14 years.

Circuit Judge Joseph Guimond said he intends to sign Haugen's death warrant soon, officially authorizing the execution.

The Salem prison has been preparing for possible execution duty for a number of months. Corrections officials say it will be handled in solemn, professional fashion by an all-volunteer team of prison employees.

And:

The state Corrections Department purchased supplies of the lethal drugs from Cardinal Health, an Ohio-based wholesale drug supplier.

Oregon's execution machinery hasn't been used since Salem double killer Harry Moore was put to death shortly after midnight on May 16, 1997.

Like Haugen, Moore waived his legal appeals and asked to be executed.

Other articles in the Statesman Journal includes, "Dozens of death sentences reduced through court system."

Death row has a revolving door.

Since Oregon voters reinstated the death penalty in 1984, dozens of death row inmates have been handed reduced sentences through appeals, court rulings and plea deals with prosecutors.

The long-running and costly legal machinations that come with capital punishment cases often are decried by death penalty proponents and opponents, but for very different reasons.

And:

In the 1990s, death row rosters were reshuffled in Oregon and across the country in the wake of a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Penry v. Texas. The high court ruled that death penalty juries must consider mitigating circumstances, if any exist, before passing a death sentence.

Because of that ruling, at least 16 Oregon death penalty cases were sent back to county circuit courts for resentencing hearings. In many cases, prosecutors cut deals that resulted in life sentences for the resentenced inmates — plea bargains aimed at saving money and sparing victims' families from reliving their anguish.

Also, "Routines on death row are 'mind-numbing,' condemned man says."

Twenty-nine of the condemned killers are white, four are black, three are Hispanic, one is Native American.

Marion County juries have sent eight of the 37 to death row, more than any other county. Four of the eight received death sentences for murdering fellow prison inmates.

Two of the condemned are housed apart from the rest: Alberto Reyes-Camarena is at the Two Rivers Correctional Institution in Umatilla, where he receives dialysis treatment necessary to keep him alive; Angela McAnulty, the only woman awaiting execution in Oregon, is housed at the Coffee Creek Correctional Facility in Wilsonville, the state's prison for women.

And, "Death penalty debate is revived."

The execution originally was scheduled for Aug. 16. However, it was canceled in June after the state Supreme Court found a Marion County judge did not do a sufficient job of evaluating Haugen's mental competency before authorizing the execution.

On Friday, the same judge again deemed Haugen mentally fit to drop his appeals, putting the execution back on track.

Haugen has repeatedly asked to be killed, saying that he is fed up with the justice system and life on death row. He reiterated his desire to die on Friday when Circuit Judge Joseph Guimond asked him to explain why he was waiving his legal appeals.

And:

Anti-death penalty activists still hope to persuade Gov. John Kitzhaber to stop the execution by commuting Haugen's death sentence to life in prison without parole.

Kitzhaber has been monitoring the case and will make his position known soon, said Tim Raphael, a spokesman for the governor.

For months, death penalty opponents have sent e-mails and letters to the governor, imploring him to commute Haugen's sentence to life in prison without parole.

Members of Oregonians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, an advocacy group leading the anti-execution campaign, say that state-sanctioned killing is immoral, arbitrary, unfair and too costly.

"The system is not fair, and I think that's un-American," said Ron Steiner of Salem, board chairman of the group.

Related posts are in the volunteer index; the term applied to those on death row who give up their appeals.  More on the 1989 Supreme Court case of Penry v. Lynaugh, via Oyez.

Lethal Injection Roundup - News from Alabama, California, South Carolina

"Alabama death row inmate asks court to stop execution because of changing key drug in protocol," is the AP report file by Bob Johnson.  It's via the Republic of Columbus, Indiana.

A convicted killer asked the Alabama Supreme Court on Monday to stop his execution because the state has not disclosed information about its new lethal injection protocol since switching to a new drug.

Attorneys for 43-year-old Jason Orec Williams filed court documents Monday asking the justices to stop Williams' scheduled May 19 execution. He was convicted of killing four people during a 1992 shooting spree in the Irvington community in Mobile County.

The court papers filed by attorneys Bryan Stevenson and Angela Setzer of the Montgomery-based Equal Justice Initiative says the state has released little information concerning how it was getting the new drug and how it would be administered.

"This lack of transparency further exacerbates concerns regarding the source and quality of this new drug," the court filing said.

State prisons' officials announced last week they were switching to the execution drug pentobarbital because of a nationwide shortage of sodium thiopental. But William' lawyers say in the court filing that the state has not provided information to the courts to ensure the execution will be carried out properly.

KALW-FM's Rina Palta reports, "No executions in California in 2011."

There will be no executions scheduled in California in 2011, according to lawyers for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. At a hearing last week in the court room of Federal District Judge Jeremy Fogel, lawyers defending the state’s lethal injection process from allegations that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment said that executions would not be feasible until 2012. The reason? There’s a new warden at San Quentin State Prison and per state regulations, he’s assembling his own lethal injection team. According to the Stockton Record:

That execution team will be chosen by late August and attorneys for the condemned prisoners won’t get documentation of their qualifications until December, lawyers for the state’s attorney general told a federal judge Friday.

Learning this, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel, who is overseeing constitutional challenges to California’s lethal-injection procedure, delayed hearing final arguments from attorneys until January.

There are some 720 inmates on California’s death row right now. Seven are eligible to be executed, having exhausted all of their appeals.

"Inmate has no plans to sue over S.C. execution changes," is the AP report by Meg Kinnard, via the Myrtle Beach Sun News.

An attorney for a South Carolina inmate condemned to die May 6 for killing his cellmate said this week he does not plan to file any appeals over the state's decision to change the drugs it uses in lethal injections.

Exactly what those drugs will be has not been determined.

The state Supreme Court ruled last month that Jeffrey Motts, 35, was mentally competent to drop his remaining appeals and be executed. Motts was serving two life sentences for killing his great-aunt and her husband as he robbed them in their Spartanburg County home for money to buy crack when he attacked and killed his cellmate at Perry Correctional Institution in December 2005, authorities said.

And:

"The fact that the execution protocol has changed ... has not changed Jeffrey's decision and his desire to die next Friday, at all," his attorney, Robert Dudek, said.

Agency spokesman John Barkley said Corrections Department officials likely will not decide until early next week if they will use pentobarbital alone, as part of a cocktail or at all in Motts' execution. There are no national guidelines advising states on what drugs to use, and Barkley said officials will study methods used by other states before announcing South Carolina's protocol.

"We will have to do something different," Barkley said. "Nothing is set in stone yet."

Motts' execution would be South Carolina's first in nearly two years, since Thomas Treshawn Ivey was put to death by lethal injection in May 2009 for the death of a 38-year-old Orangeburg police sergeant.

Inmate who choose to waive their appeals are ofter referred to as volunteers.  Related posts are in the execution date and lethal injection indexes.

Louisiana Legislation Would OK Waiver of Appeals

"Senate panel backs appeal waiver," is the title of Mark Ballard's report in today's Baton Rouge Advocate.

A Senate committee advanced legislation Tuesday that was executed killer Gerald J. Bordelon’s dying wish: that those facing the death penalty can waive their right to appeal and proceed with the sentence.

Bordelon, 47, was executed by lethal injection Jan. 7 for the November 2002 kidnapping, rape and murder of his 12-year-old stepdaughter, Courtney LeBlanc, of Livingston Parish. He gave up his right to appeal, but legal proceedings took an additional three years before his execution took place.

“He was frustrated because it took three years to do something that seemed so simple,” said Jill Craft, who represented Bordelon during the time leading up to his execution.

Bordelon’s sister, Melissa Wise, sat in the audience when the Senate Judiciary C committee approved without objection Senate Bill 774, which is sponsored by state Sen. Dan Claitor, R-Baton Rouge.

Immediately after the vote, Craft and Wise told each other that this bill was what Bordelon wanted.

Craft said at her first meetings with him, Bordelon took “great delight” in sharing details of the crimes he had committed.

But over time, Craft said, Bordelon became more religious and more remorseful over the acts he had committed. Bordelon also came to believe that if ever released from prison again, he would commit crimes against children again, she said.

Bordelon wrote letters of apology to the victim’s sister and mother, asking for forgiveness, Craft said. He also asked Craft to pursue legislation that would streamline the procedures in order to speed the time between when a convicted murderer forgoes further appeals and when capital punishment is carried out.

Craft noted that higher courts automatically review the cases of all defendants convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death. That would not change should SB774 become law, she said.

But the measure, which was supported by the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, would require a judge to inform the defendant, orally and in writing at the time of sentencing, “of this right to waive appeal.”