FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Prosecutors Weep; Ninth Circuit Overturns 127 Death Sentences

On September 2, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Summerlin v. Stewart that death sentences imposed by judges rather than juries must be set aside. A logical outgrowth of two recent Supreme Court decisions, the Ninth Circuit’s decision could lead to the technical commutation of sentences of more than 127 prisoners in Arizona, Montana, and Idaho. That is, unless prosecutors ask for and seek a stay of the decision pending an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. These are the three states within the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit that utilize judges, not juries, to sentence defendants in capital cases.

The high court will surely review the decision, given the sheer numbers of sentences involved. And a Supreme Court decision that reverses the Ninth Circuit would be tough to justify. For in its landmark ruling in 2000 in the case of Appredi v. New Jersey, the Court held that juries must decide beyond reasonable doubt every fact that leads to the imposition of an increased penalty for the defendant (e.g., a 20-year as opposed to a 10-year sentence based on the amount of drugs sold). Such determinations must not be made by judges, the Court said.

The court extended this logic to the death penalty last year in Ring v. Arizona, ruling that juries must determine the factual bases for death sentences. In so ruling, the justices invalidated judge-based capital sentencing systems in Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Colorado and Nebraska.

What the high court did not decide was whether or not its ruling must be applied retroactively or only to sentences after the date of the Court’s ruling. The Ninth Circuit, in an 8-3 majority of all sitting judges, essentially said that the Ring ruling had so transformed the constitutional framework governing the imposition of death sentences that it would be unconstitutional to execute someone who had been sentenced under a pre-Ring system.

According to The Washington Post, If the Ninth Circuit ruling is upheld, the impact could extend to Nebraska and Colorado, which had similar laws to Arizona, Idaho and Montana, and where an additional nine death row inmates might benefit, according to Deborah Fins, who tracks the death-row population for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, an anti-capital punishment organization.

Four other states, Florida, Alabama, Delaware and Indiana, with a total death row population of 632, have used hybrid systems in which juries advise judges, but judges make the final call. These systems may also face court challenges under Ring.

Imagine how this news upsets prosecutors (especially the chief prosecutor in the land, Attorney General John Ashcroft), who cherish the death penalty and will stop at nothing to see it imposed. You can be sure they are pouring over the decision and poking holes in it sufficient to convince the Supreme Court that retroactively applying a decision is unfair–that people dying after the Court has said the process is illegal is a fine thing. When the state assumes the role of “Deity,” the opinion said, it better be right. It is not right to say that tomorrow’s defendant must be sentenced to death by a jury, but for yesterday’s accused, death will do. Responding to the three dissenters, the majority challenged this “warped” view of justice:

Is it possible that prisoners will now be executed by the state solely because of the happenstance that the Supreme Court recognized the correctness of their constitutional arguments too late–on a wholly arbitrary date, rather than when it should have? Will we add to all of the other arbitrariness infecting our administration of the death penalty the pure fortuity of when the Supreme Court recognized its own critical error with respect to the meaning of the Constitution? Can we justify executing those whose legal efforts had reached a certain point in our imperfect legal process on the day the Supreme Court changed its mind, while invalidating the death sentences of those whose cases were waiting slightly further down the line?

…{I}f our society truly honors its constitutional values, it will not tolerate the execution by the state of individuals whose capital sentences were imposed in violation of their constitutional rights. It should not take a constitutional scholar to comprehend that point.

Whether the high court will muster a majority that is as morally outraged as the Ninth Circuit remains to be seen. It may not take a constitutional scholar to comprehend the unfairness of killing people whose appeals were completed before Ring. But it will take five of nine Supreme Court justices acting boldly and compassionately and resisting political pressure to go along with the arbitrary machinery of death grinding away day to day in the death houses of American prisons.

ELAINE CASSEL practices law in Virginia and the District of Columbia, teachers law and psychology, and follows the Bush regime’s dismantling of the Constitution at Civil Liberties Watch. She can be reached at: ecassel1@cox.net

More articles by:

December 10, 2018
Jacques R. Pauwels
Foreign Interventions in Revolutionary Russia
Richard Klin
The Disasters of War
Katie Fite
Rebranding Bundy
Gary Olson
A Few Thoughts on Politics and Personal Identity
Patrick Cockburn
Brexit Britain’s Crisis of Self-Confidence Will Only End in Tears and Rising Nationalism
Andrew Moss
Undocumented Citizen
Dean Baker
Trump and China: Going With Patent Holders Against Workers
Lawrence Wittner
Reviving the Nuclear Disarmament Movement: a Practical Proposal
Dan Siegel
Thoughts on the 2018 Elections and Beyond
Thomas Knapp
Election 2020: I Can Smell the Dumpster Fires Already
Weekend Edition
December 07, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Steve Hendricks
What If We Just Buy Off Big Fossil Fuel? A Novel Plan to Mitigate the Climate Calamity
Jeffrey St. Clair
Cancer as Weapon: Poppy Bush’s Radioactive War on Iraq
Paul Street
The McCain and Bush Death Tours: Establishment Rituals in How to be a Proper Ruler
Jason Hirthler
Laws of the Jungle: The Free Market and the Continuity of Change
Ajamu Baraka
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70: Time to De-Colonize Human Rights!
Andrew Levine
Thoughts on Strategy for a Left Opposition
Jennifer Matsui
Dead of Night Redux: A Zombie Rises, A Spook Falls
Rob Urie
Degrowth: Toward a Green Revolution
Binoy Kampmark
The Bomb that Did Not Detonate: Julian Assange, Manafort and The Guardian
Robert Hunziker
The Deathly Insect Dilemma
Robert Fisk
Spare Me the American Tears for the Murder of Jamal Khashoggi
Joseph Natoli
Tribal Justice
Ron Jacobs
Getting Pushed Off the Capitalist Cliff
Macdonald Stainsby
Unist’ot’en Camp is Under Threat in Northern Canada
Senator Tom Harkin
Questions for Vice-President Bush on Posada Carriles
W. T. Whitney
Two Years and Colombia’s Peace Agreement is in Shreds
Ron Jacobs
Getting Pushed Off the Capitalist Cliff
Ramzy Baroud
The Conspiracy Against Refugees
David Rosen
The Swamp Stinks: Trump & Washington’s Rot
Raouf Halaby
Wall-to-Wall Whitewashing
Daniel Falcone
Noam Chomsky Turns 90
Dean Baker
An Inverted Bond Yield Curve: Is a Recession Coming?
Nick Pemberton
The Case For Chuck Mertz (Not Noam Chomsky) as America’s Leading Intellectual
Ralph Nader
New Book about Ethics and Whistleblowing for Engineers Affects Us All!
Dan Kovalik
The Return of the Nicaraguan Contras, and the Rise of the Pro-Contra Left
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Exposing the Crimes of the CIAs Fair-Haired Boy, Paul Kagame, and the Rwandan Patriotic Front
Jasmine Aguilera
Lessons From South of the Border
Manuel García, Jr.
A Formula for U.S. Election Outcomes
Sam Pizzigati
Drug Company Execs Make Millions Misleading Cancer Patients. Here’s One Way to Stop Them
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Agriculture as Wrong Turn
James McEnteer
And That’s The Way It Is: Essential Journalism Books of 2018
Chris Gilbert
Biplav’s Communist Party of Nepal on the Move: Dispatch by a Far-Flung Bolivarian
Judith Deutsch
Siloed Thinking, Climate, and Disposable People: COP 24 and Our Discontent
Jill Richardson
Republicans Don’t Want Your Vote to Count
John Feffer
‘Get Me Outta Here’: Trump Turns the G20 into the G19
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail