Judge and Jury Ignorant of Severe Abuse Death Row Inmate Endured
Robert Gattis suffered extreme and ongoing physical and sexual abuse as a child and adolescent, but the judge and jury never heard about this information was not shared during his trial or sentencing. Gattis has also expressed deep remorse for the murder that he committed and been a model of good behavior throughout his time on death row. Arguing that the death penalty should be reserved for “the worst of the worst offenders,” a number of former judges and prosecutors, some recruited by TCP, wrote to the Governor of Delaware and the Delaware Board of Pardons urging them to grant Gattis clemency. The calls for clemency from these former judges and prosecutors were bolstered by additional voices of support, including 73 faith leaders and numerous mental health professionals. Gattis is scheduled to be executed on January 20, 2012.
Oregon Becomes Fifth State to Halt Death Penalty
After calling Oregon’s capital punishment system “a perversion of justice,” Governor John Kitzhaber said, “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.” The governor’s November 22nd announcement makes Oregon the fifth state to halt executions in recent years. New York's highest court declared its death penalty statute unconstitutional in 2004. New Jersey repealed its death penalty law in 2007. New Mexico followed in 2009 and Illinois earlier this year. TCP takes no position on whether the death penalty should remain a part of our criminal justice system, but insists that where it does exist, there must be robust safeguards that help ensure a fair trial and protect people from being wrongfully executed. In a letter, TCP applauded the governor’s commitment to ensuring that capitol punishment is fairly administered. Former Governor of Texas and TCP Death Penalty Committee Co-Chair Mark White also spoke out in support of Kitzhaber’s decision in a recent op-ed in the Statesman-Journal, saying “such a decision should be welcomed by all who value justice, regardless of their personal beliefs about the death penalty.”
Texas Stays skinner Execution for Review of DNA-Related Claim
Ever since his arrest and conviction for the 1993 murder of Twila Busby and her sons, Elwin Caler and Randy Busby, Henry “Hank” Skinner has maintained his innocence. Several items from the crime scene containing DNA evidence could confirm or deny his innocence claim, yet Texas officials have repeatedly denied requests to test the evidence. Skinner was scheduled to be executed on November 9th without these DNA tests ever having been conducted, but on November 7th the Texas Court of Appeals granted a stay until legal claims related to the testing of DNA evidence can be addressed. In an op-ed in the Austin American-Statesman, No Good Reason for State to Deny DNA Testing, TCP Death Penalty Committee members Mark White (former Texas governor) and William S. Sessions (former FBI director and federal judge in Texas) call on the courts or the governor to stay the execution in order to allow the testing to take place. They write that, while “the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for certain crimes,” they are “united in [their] deep conviction that when it comes to the death penalty, there is no room for uncertainty.” Several days ago, a number of prominent Texas officials and former prosecutors, including TCP Death Penalty Committee members Sam Millsap and James Fry, also called on the prosecutor and governor to test the DNA before proceeding with the execution.
Clearinghouse of New Voices on Criminal Justice Reform
Our Clearinghouse of New Voices on Criminal Justice Reform is a database of individuals who support criminal justice reforms, but who have traditionally been seen as "unlikely allies" for reform--and thus as particularly persuasive and influential.
These unlikely allies include former judges, prosecutors, police officers, corrections officers, and conservatives. We promote these individuals' voices in criminal justice reform campaigns on the federal and state levels.
Fraud Offense Guidelines Need Facelift
In their present form, federal sentencing guidelines for fraud offenses have repeatedly led to disproportionate or inconsistent sentences being meted out. Additionally, in a growing number of cases judges sentenced offenders below the guidelines' recommendations. This is a direct consequence of the guidelines placing too much emphasis on quantifiable factors – monetary loss is one example – while ignoring important factors, such as mental illness, when deciding the severity of a case. In comments submitted to the U.S. Sentencing Commission on August 25, 2011, TCP strongly impels the commission to review fraud offense guidelines as part of the current amendment cycle. A broader look at the structure and function of sentencing guidelines can be found in earlier reports, Principles for the Design and Reform of Sentencing: A Background Report, and Recommendations for Federal Criminal Sentencing in a Post-Booker World.
SCOTUS Denies Cert in Death Penalty Case Marred by Prosecutor-Judge Affair
Once again, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of Charles Hood, a death row inmate from Texas who was sentenced to death in 1990 for murdering Ronald Williamson and Tracie Lynn Wallace. The case gained considerable attention when it was discovered that the prosecutor and the judge at Hood's trial had a romantic affair. In 2010, The Constitution Project assembled a group of judges and prosecutors who filed an amicus brief arguing that Hood was entitled to a new trial.
Flawed Cost-Cutting Proposals Threaten Indigent Defendants’ Constitutional Rights
In an effort to cut costs, the Supreme Court of Tennessee and counties in Arizona and Nevada have each recently proposed changes to the provision of indigent defense services that involve versions of flat-fee contracts systems. As explained in comments submitted by TCP to the Tennessee Supreme Court,Cochise County, Arizona and Washoe County, Nevada, these proposals could also result in fewer attorneys accepting indigent clients, less experienced attorneys representing indigent defendants, overwhelming caseloads for appointed counsel, attorneys allocating insufficient time to each case, and excessive plea bargaining. TCP’s 2009 report, Justice Denied: The Continuing Neglect of the Constitutional Right to Counsel and recent news articles further outline the dangers of these proposed reforms. Additionally, on Wednesday, August 31, 2011, The Tennessean published an Op-Ed from TCP President Virginia Sloan calling on the court to reject the fixed-fee contract proposal.
Criminal Justice Reform in Difficult Economic Times
Since the economic collapse in 2008, lawmakers across the country have struggled to cut costs in many areas, including the criminal justice system - a difficult task considering that, in 2008, federal, state, and local governments spent approximately $62 billion on correction costs alone, and an additional $27 billion is estimated as necessary for prison expansion and operation over the next five years. But balancing improvements to our justice system with an acknowledgement of shrinking budgets is just what a bipartisan coalition of the nation's leading criminal justice policy organizations set out to do in their report Smart on Crime: Recommendations for the Administration and Congress. Christopher Durocher and Adrienne Lee Benson provide an overview of some of Smart on Crime's recommendations in their article "A Reform Roadmap for the Criminal Justice System", published in the July-August issue of Judicature.
Seminal Report on Criminal Justice Reform Released
Earlier this year, a diverse coalition of over 40 criminal justice organizations released Smart on Crime: Recommendations for the Administration and Congress, among the most comprehensive reports ever published to address the problems confronting America’s criminal justice system. Nearly 100 detailed policy recommendations across 16 criminal justice areas were developed to provide a spur to action for the Administration and Congress. In the Coalition’s announcement, Virginia Sloan, President of The Constitution Project noted, “Smart on Crime contains an ever-increasing and bipartisan consensus on how to fix the problems that have for too long plagued the system.”
A Smart on CrimeWeb site was also created to provide policy-makers, media and the public with easy access to the report. In video-taped interviews, several Smart on Crime report contributors shared their unique insights on how to fix the system of justice they care so passionately about. Media outlets, including the Legal Times, reported on the release of the publication.
Click on Part One, Part Two, and Part Three to view the video-taped interviews.
