Post by Anja on Jun 12, 2006 10:28:25 GMT -5
ABA calls for death penalty moratorium in Alabama
The American Bar Association death penalty assessment team recommended a
moratorium on the death penalty in Alabama in a report released Sunday
that cited major flaws in the state's administration of capital
punishment. The assessment team, composed of Alabama lawyers who are both
prosecutors and defense attorneys, studied the state's death penalty
system for approximately 20 months before releasing the report, which
Alabama Attorney General Troy King accused of "liberal, activist" bias.
The report, which only recommends a moratorium until due process standards
can be fixed, identified several problems including inadequate and
inconsistent court-appointed representation, limited access to DNA
testing, and no implementation of the US Supreme Court ruling against
executing the mentally retarded. The ABA hopes that the report will
encourage the legislature to impose a moratorium until it can reform the
capital punishment system when it convenes later this year.
The Alabama assessment is one of several being conducted by the ABA and an
assessment panel has also identified problems with Georgia's death penalty
practices. In January, the Georgia assessment team also recommended a
moratorium on capital punishment until flaws could be corrected, but
Georgia officials suggested that the legislature had no plans to reform
the state's system.
(source: The Jurist)
****
ALABAMA'S DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORM
Regardless of one's feelings about the morality of the death penalty, we
all understand that, as a society, we must do all we can to ensure a fair
and accurate system for every person who faces the death penalty. When a
life is at stake, we cannot tolerate error or injustice. The Alabama Death
Penalty Assessment Team found a number of problems in the state's death
penalty system that undermines its fairness and accuracy. Highlighted
below are proposed areas for reform that would help to improve the system.
Until these reforms are implemented, a temporary moratorium on executions
should be imposed.
1. ALABAMA SHOULD ENSURE THAT ALL POOR DEFENDANTS RECEIVE COMPETENT
COUNSEL AT EVERY STAGE OF THE CAPITAL PROCESS.
In the United States, poor criminal defendants are entitled to attorneys,
and while the availability and quality of defense counsel is central to a
fair and accurate death penalty system, capital defendants in Alabama too
often do not receive the full benefit of this Constitutional guarantee.
The State's failure to provide statewide oversight of its indigent defense
system, combined with the minimal qualifications and non-existent training
required of attorneys who represent capital defendants, leads to a system
where serious fairness and accuracy breakdowns are virtually inevitable.
Alabama should create a statewide indigent defense commission to help fix
these problems.
Compounding this problem, Alabama is 1 of only 2 states that does not even
guarantee a lawyer in the state post-conviction portion of the death
penalty process, even if the inmate might have new evidence of innocence.
2. ALABAMA SHOULD PROTECT INNOCENT DEATH ROW INMATES BY PROVIDING A CLEAR
METHOD TO OBTAIN DNA TESTING.
DNA has proven to be an enormously useful law enforcement tool for proving
both guilt and innocence, but Alabama has failed to pass a law that
ensures access to DNA testing for people convicted of capital crimes.
Additionally, Alabama does not require that biological evidence be
preserved throughout the capital inmate's incarceration, thereby enabling
the potential destruction of evidence that could be used to prove
innocence.
3. ALABAMA SHOULD ENSURE THAT MENTALLY RETARDED DEFENDANTS ARE PROTECTED
FROM UNCONSTIUTIONAL EXECUTION.
In accordance with United States Supreme Court case law banning the
execution of offenders with mental retardation, 26 states have adopted
statues prohibiting this practice. Alabama is not one of them.
Consequently, and despite repeated pleas from judges in the state, courts
have been forced to cobble together stopgap standards and procedures to
comply with the United States Supreme Court decision. The Legislature's
abdication of its responsibilities in this area has resulted in the
legitimate risk that Alabama might continue to execute mentally retarded
offenders.
4. ALABAMA SHOULD PROVIDE JURIES WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR SENTENCING
DECISIONS.
Alabama should strengthen the jury's role in capital sentencing by
eliminating "judge override," the rule that allows judges to disregard
juries' sentencing recommendations. Judge override diminishes jurors'
sense of responsibility for the enormous life and death decision they must
make, and results in jurors paying less attention to jury instructions and
deliberating for less time. All of this can result in unfairness and
inaccuracy. In addition to eliminating judge override, Alabama should
require juries to be unanimous in recommending a death sentence. Bottom
line: Alabama should respect the ability of juries to "get it right."
5. ALABAMA SHOULD RESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY FOR THE "WORST OF THE WORST."
Meaningful proportionality review is the best method of protecting against
unfairness in capital sentencing. This sort of review should compare the
case under consideration to similar cases in which (1) death was imposed,
(2) death was sought but not imposed, and (3) death could have been sought
but was not. In conducting its proportionality review, however, the
Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals limits itself to cases where the death
penalty was imposed, thereby increasing the likelihood of unfair death
sentences.
6. ALABAMA SHOULD COLLECT AND STUDY THE DATA NECESSARY TO FULLY UNDERSTAND
HOW ITS SYSTEM IS FUNCTIONING.
It is imperative to have thorough and accurate information when gauging
the health of Alabama's capital system. Unfortunately, Alabama does not
collect and/or make available the data that is necessary to understand
whether the death penalty is being applied fairly and accurately. In fact,
the ABA could not even answer whether Alabama met or failed to meet 14 of
the 80 recommendations contained in the assessment report.
(source: ABA Assessment)
The American Bar Association death penalty assessment team recommended a
moratorium on the death penalty in Alabama in a report released Sunday
that cited major flaws in the state's administration of capital
punishment. The assessment team, composed of Alabama lawyers who are both
prosecutors and defense attorneys, studied the state's death penalty
system for approximately 20 months before releasing the report, which
Alabama Attorney General Troy King accused of "liberal, activist" bias.
The report, which only recommends a moratorium until due process standards
can be fixed, identified several problems including inadequate and
inconsistent court-appointed representation, limited access to DNA
testing, and no implementation of the US Supreme Court ruling against
executing the mentally retarded. The ABA hopes that the report will
encourage the legislature to impose a moratorium until it can reform the
capital punishment system when it convenes later this year.
The Alabama assessment is one of several being conducted by the ABA and an
assessment panel has also identified problems with Georgia's death penalty
practices. In January, the Georgia assessment team also recommended a
moratorium on capital punishment until flaws could be corrected, but
Georgia officials suggested that the legislature had no plans to reform
the state's system.
(source: The Jurist)
****
ALABAMA'S DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORM
Regardless of one's feelings about the morality of the death penalty, we
all understand that, as a society, we must do all we can to ensure a fair
and accurate system for every person who faces the death penalty. When a
life is at stake, we cannot tolerate error or injustice. The Alabama Death
Penalty Assessment Team found a number of problems in the state's death
penalty system that undermines its fairness and accuracy. Highlighted
below are proposed areas for reform that would help to improve the system.
Until these reforms are implemented, a temporary moratorium on executions
should be imposed.
1. ALABAMA SHOULD ENSURE THAT ALL POOR DEFENDANTS RECEIVE COMPETENT
COUNSEL AT EVERY STAGE OF THE CAPITAL PROCESS.
In the United States, poor criminal defendants are entitled to attorneys,
and while the availability and quality of defense counsel is central to a
fair and accurate death penalty system, capital defendants in Alabama too
often do not receive the full benefit of this Constitutional guarantee.
The State's failure to provide statewide oversight of its indigent defense
system, combined with the minimal qualifications and non-existent training
required of attorneys who represent capital defendants, leads to a system
where serious fairness and accuracy breakdowns are virtually inevitable.
Alabama should create a statewide indigent defense commission to help fix
these problems.
Compounding this problem, Alabama is 1 of only 2 states that does not even
guarantee a lawyer in the state post-conviction portion of the death
penalty process, even if the inmate might have new evidence of innocence.
2. ALABAMA SHOULD PROTECT INNOCENT DEATH ROW INMATES BY PROVIDING A CLEAR
METHOD TO OBTAIN DNA TESTING.
DNA has proven to be an enormously useful law enforcement tool for proving
both guilt and innocence, but Alabama has failed to pass a law that
ensures access to DNA testing for people convicted of capital crimes.
Additionally, Alabama does not require that biological evidence be
preserved throughout the capital inmate's incarceration, thereby enabling
the potential destruction of evidence that could be used to prove
innocence.
3. ALABAMA SHOULD ENSURE THAT MENTALLY RETARDED DEFENDANTS ARE PROTECTED
FROM UNCONSTIUTIONAL EXECUTION.
In accordance with United States Supreme Court case law banning the
execution of offenders with mental retardation, 26 states have adopted
statues prohibiting this practice. Alabama is not one of them.
Consequently, and despite repeated pleas from judges in the state, courts
have been forced to cobble together stopgap standards and procedures to
comply with the United States Supreme Court decision. The Legislature's
abdication of its responsibilities in this area has resulted in the
legitimate risk that Alabama might continue to execute mentally retarded
offenders.
4. ALABAMA SHOULD PROVIDE JURIES WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR SENTENCING
DECISIONS.
Alabama should strengthen the jury's role in capital sentencing by
eliminating "judge override," the rule that allows judges to disregard
juries' sentencing recommendations. Judge override diminishes jurors'
sense of responsibility for the enormous life and death decision they must
make, and results in jurors paying less attention to jury instructions and
deliberating for less time. All of this can result in unfairness and
inaccuracy. In addition to eliminating judge override, Alabama should
require juries to be unanimous in recommending a death sentence. Bottom
line: Alabama should respect the ability of juries to "get it right."
5. ALABAMA SHOULD RESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY FOR THE "WORST OF THE WORST."
Meaningful proportionality review is the best method of protecting against
unfairness in capital sentencing. This sort of review should compare the
case under consideration to similar cases in which (1) death was imposed,
(2) death was sought but not imposed, and (3) death could have been sought
but was not. In conducting its proportionality review, however, the
Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals limits itself to cases where the death
penalty was imposed, thereby increasing the likelihood of unfair death
sentences.
6. ALABAMA SHOULD COLLECT AND STUDY THE DATA NECESSARY TO FULLY UNDERSTAND
HOW ITS SYSTEM IS FUNCTIONING.
It is imperative to have thorough and accurate information when gauging
the health of Alabama's capital system. Unfortunately, Alabama does not
collect and/or make available the data that is necessary to understand
whether the death penalty is being applied fairly and accurately. In fact,
the ABA could not even answer whether Alabama met or failed to meet 14 of
the 80 recommendations contained in the assessment report.
(source: ABA Assessment)