Texas Executes its 400th Person since 1976

1) The 21 Day Rule- New Evidence can only be introduced before 21 days after the sentence is handed down.

2) There is no requirement that evidence from capital cases be preserved until after the appeals process.

I also think its worth noting that an African American who kills a white person is twice as likely as a white person who kills a minority to get a death sentence. (Source)

Below the fold there is a 2002 column by Republican Delegate Vince Callahan on why Virginia should end the Death Penalty:

In the past, I have been a strong advocate of the death penalty. I voted in
favor of the resumption of capital punishment in 1977, and I have supported
additional provisions expanding the categories of criminal actions for which
the death penalty may be imposed.

However, I have now become one of those who believe that we must take
another look at the death penalty. In other words, I have come full circle
when it comes to giving our states such as Virginia the power to take the
life of a human being.
In fact, I'm now proposing a two-year moratorium on executions.

Why do I think it's time we should take another look at the death penalty?
In the first place, there is insurmountable evidence that capital punishment
is no deterrent to murder. Even the most ardent advocates of keeping the
death penalty have dropped that argument.

But there are other compelling reasons as well.

In my capacity as chairman of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review
Commission (JLARC), the Virginia Legislature's watchdog agency, I initiated
a study on the application of capital punishment throughout the state.

The JLARC study concluded that, more than any other factor, geographical
location within the Commonwealth was most strongly associated with the
decision by the Commonwealth Attorneys to seek the death penalty. The study
noted that "the overall rate at which local prosecutors in high density
jurisdictions sought the death penalty in capital-eligible cases was 200
percent lower than was observed in medium density localities. Thus a key
question for this study was whether the factors which appear to be
associated with the decision of Commonwealth Attorneys to seek the death
penalty in capital murder are related to the specifics of the case (such as
type of crime, nature of evidence), external to the case (such as type of
locality), or extra-legal (such as the defendant's race)."

In other words, a murderer is twice as likely to face a death sentence in a
rural setting than if the same act were committed in a city.

I found the fact that the imposition of the death penalty depends on where
in the Commonwealth a crime was committed profoundly troubling.

The JLARC study also addresses the "21-Day rule" as it exists in Virginia.
That rule-common to both civil and criminal matters in Virginia-requires any
party seeking review of a trial court decision to do so within 21 days of
date of entry of the final judgment, or sentence. After that, you are out of
luck.

The rule itself has merit. It is important that judgments be final, and that
cases do not continue forever. The problem arises when the desire for
finality overrides the need for accuracy. In  the criminal context, at
present, an individual may be sentenced to death, and remain subject to that
sentence, if an alibi witness conclusively able to exculpate a defendant, is
located 22 days after that person's final sentence.

Many jurisdictions continue to impose time limits on the reintroduction of
new evidence; however, Virginia's 21-day rule limitation is the shortest in
the United States.

The JLARC report also notes that, in Virginia, as in many other states,
there remain longstanding questions concerning the quality of legal
representation afforded indigents who are charged with capital murder. The
adequacy of legal representation remains a serious issue, and will in all
likelihood remain so, given the woefully inadequate compensation paid to
court appointed lawyers in the Commonwealth, the almost universal lack of
funds for investigative and other support services.

In contrast, other states, such as Washington State, provide public
defenders' offices with the same funding for lawyers and investigators as
the prosecutors. The defendant at least has a fighting chance to get
reasonable representation and reasonable investigative support.

Public sentiment in Virginia appears to still favor the death penalty.
Politicians listen to pollsters.

However, I believe it is time for a new dialogue on the death penalty. New
scientific evidence, such as DNA testing, has revolutionized all areas of
crime detection, criminal prosecution, and criminal defense. It is time to
take a fresh look at how, and when, Virginia imposes the death penalty (now
second only to Texas in the number of executions). It is time to look
carefully at the means by which people who are incarcerated wrongfully might
have their sentences reviewed based on newly discovered evidence.

A moratorium on executions for two years would allow for that dialogue to
begin. Those individuals presently awaiting execution will not have their
sentences vacated or otherwise set aside. Any individuals now awaiting trial
are still subject to the death penalty as at present.

I do not have any preconceived ideas on what, if anything, should be done
specifically to "fix" our current system. However, I have come to believe
that our current system is not working.

I believe that elected officials and the public will come to the same
conclusion once they review recent studies and evidence. A moratorium on the
death penalty will give elected officials and the general public the chance
to take a hard look at the evidence to see whether the death penalty is
serving its purpose.

Comments