mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Apr 19, 2010 9:34:11 GMT -6
Since there are 12 pages of names listed and I don't know the name of every slob on death row, I can't give the definitive list. Names I do recognize are:
Charles Hood Peter Cantu Delma Banks
...and I'm sure there are many more.
|
|
mst3k4evur
Inactive
Member of the Month - 4/09
Ameeerrrrrricaaa, F**k Yah!
Posts: 3,701
|
Post by mst3k4evur on Apr 19, 2010 11:10:30 GMT -6
I'm not sure about Banks and Hood has a resentencing on different grounds. Cantu, on the other hand, looks to be out of appeals in all courts.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 19, 2010 11:13:56 GMT -6
www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/19/court-denies-texans-appeal-da-judge-affair/HOUSTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left in place the conviction of a man sent to Texas death row despite the admission of an affair between his trial judge and the prosecutor. The justices did not comment in turning down Charles Dean Hood's appeal. The decision does not change a ruling earlier this year from a Texas appeals court that ordered a new punishment trial for Hood on a legal point unrelated to the affair. In his Supreme Court appeal, Hood sought an entirely new trial based on the once-secret romantic relationship between the trial judge, Verla Sue Holland, and Tom O'Connell, the former district attorney in Collin County. Hood, 41, a former topless club bouncer, has insisted he is innocent in the 1989 fatal shootings of Tracie Lynn Wallace, 26, and her boyfriend, Ronald Williamson, 46, at their home in Plano. "We are disheartened that the United States Supreme Court ruled not to hear the case of Charles Hood in which the trial judge and district attorney who prosecuted Hood engaged in a secret, long-term, extramarital affair," said Andrea Keilen, director of the Texas Defender Service, a legal group representing Hood. "This is particularly disappointing given that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to date has ignored this obvious and outrageous constitutional violation. "No one should be prosecuted for a parking ticket let alone for capital murder by the district attorney who has had a sexual affair with the judge handling the case and despite the Court's decision today, we will continue to zealously represent Mr. Hood as we believe his case was marred by a fundamental injustice." The Collin County prosecutor's office had no immediate comment on the ruling. In a separate appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeals, Texas' highest criminal court, said in February that Hood was entitled to a new punishment trial because jurors were not allowed to properly consider mitigating evidence that could have convinced them he didn't deserve a death sentence. The ruling made no mention of the affair between Holland and the prosecutor in Collin County in suburban Dallas. Last year, the same court refused Hood's appeal for an entirely new trial because of the affair admission. A day before he was scheduled to die in September 2008, the court gave Hood a reprieve based on the faulty jury instruction claim. O'Connell was the county's elected prosecutor from 1971-82 and 1987-2002. Holland was a state district judge from 1981-96 before moving on to the Court of Criminal Appeals, where she served before resigning in 2001. Hood was convicted in 1990. He was arrested in Indiana while driving Williamson's $70,000 Cadillac, and his fingerprints were discovered at the murder scene. Hood said he had permission to drive the car and his fingerprints were at the house because he had been living there and doing odd jobs for Williamson. Neither Holland nor O'Connell has been publicly disciplined by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct or the State Bar of Texas. Their relationship apparently was an open secret in Collin County legal circles. In an affidavit related to the Hood case, a former assistant district attorney said it was common knowledge. In the legal wrangling to block Hood's execution, the former couple acknowledged under oath they had an intimate relationship.
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Apr 19, 2010 11:47:32 GMT -6
In the legal wrangling to block Hood's execution, the former couple acknowledged under oath they had an intimate relationship.
Blah blah blah. They had a brief affair that ended years before the trial commenced plus Hood received a fair trial. The TCAA overturned the sentence and remanded the case back to the trial court because the jury didn't get to hear as mitigation that when Hood turned 4 years old, he didn't get a pony for his birthday: goo.gl/NMvq The dissenting opinion is more interesting: goo.gl/pRyrThe AG has 90 days (from 2/24/2010) to appeal, otherwise, Texas must hold a new penalty trial.
|
|
|
Post by Charlene on Apr 19, 2010 11:52:42 GMT -6
Great news. Since there are 12 pages of names listed and I don't know the name of every slob on death row, I can't give the definitive list. Names I do recognize are: Charles Hood Peter CantuDelma Banks ...and I'm sure there are many more.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 19, 2010 11:56:18 GMT -6
Here is a question I do not immediately know the answer to:
Hood committed his crime and was initially sentenced to death before LWOP was an option in Texas. Now LWOP is an option. At his new sentencing hearing, the jury will seemingly have to decide between life with the possibility of parole or death. What I am wondering is whether, if the state and Hood both agreed to it, LWOP could be an option even though it was unavailable at the the time of the offense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2010 12:02:33 GMT -6
Cantu, on the other hand, looks to be out of appeals in all courts. Finally some good news.
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Apr 19, 2010 12:36:34 GMT -6
Here is a question I do not immediately know the answer to: Hood committed his crime and was initially sentenced to death before LWOP was an option in Texas. Now LWOP is an option. At his new sentencing hearing, the jury will seemingly have to decide between life with the possibility of parole or death. What I am wondering is whether, if the state and Hood both agreed to it, LWOP could be an option even though it was unavailable at the the time of the offense. No. LWOP would still be an ex post facto, i.e., illegal, sentence. Neither the state nor a judge can legally agree to an illegal sentence. The state could agree to Hood pleading to both counts of first degree murder if the judge would impose two consecutive life sentences. However, the state has nothing to lose by going forward on the penalty trial.
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Apr 19, 2010 12:54:34 GMT -6
It appears that Skinner was kicked to next Friday, April 23rd, for conference.
|
|
forgesfire
Old Hand
The masses of humanity have always had to suffer
Posts: 546
|
Post by forgesfire on Apr 19, 2010 13:08:38 GMT -6
Two inmates in Mississippi lost their appeals. U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Mississippi death row cases JACKSON, Miss. -- The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear appeals in two death penalty cases from Mississippi. The high court Monday turned back appeals for Paul E. Woodward and Gerald James Holland. Woodward was convicted in Perry County in the 1986 slaying of volunteer Youth Court worker Rhonda Crane. Woodward claimed his rights were violated when a Mississippi court sent him to a state hospital for a mental evaluation rather than letting him be examined by an independent expert. Holland was convicted in Harrison County for the 1987 death of 15-year-old Krystal King. Holland claimed a trial judge erred in denying him the right to counter evidence of rape raised by prosecutors during the trial's sentencing phase. Read more: www.sunherald.com/2010/04/19/2110899/miss-death-row-cases-before-nations.html#ixzz0lZhMPif9
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Apr 19, 2010 13:23:00 GMT -6
Here is a question I do not immediately know the answer to: Hood committed his crime and was initially sentenced to death before LWOP was an option in Texas. Now LWOP is an option. At his new sentencing hearing, the jury will seemingly have to decide between life with the possibility of parole or death. What I am wondering is whether, if the state and Hood both agreed to it, LWOP could be an option even though it was unavailable at the the time of the offense. Can they give him LWOP since there was no LWOP option at that time?
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Apr 19, 2010 13:24:22 GMT -6
Condemned Houston teen gang leader loses appealHOUSTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review an appeal from a death row inmate accused of being the ringleader of a gang of teens convicted in the 1993 rape and killing of two Houston girls. The high court denial Monday means 34-year-old Peter Cantu is likely to get an execution date soon. Cantu was condemned for the murders of 16-year-old Elizabeth Pena and her 14-year-old friend, Jennifer Ertman. The girls were gang raped, beaten and strangled in an attack in Houston. Evidence showed the girls had stumbled upon a gang initiation. Cantu was 18 at the time of the slayings. Two of his companions already have been executed. Two others had their sentences commuted to life after the Supreme Court barred the execution of those under 18 at the time of their crimes. www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6965461.html
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 19, 2010 13:31:16 GMT -6
Condemned Houston teen gang leader loses appealHOUSTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review an appeal from a death row inmate accused of being the ringleader of a gang of teens convicted in the 1993 rape and killing of two Houston girls. The high court denial Monday means 34-year-old Peter Cantu is likely to get an execution date soon. Cantu was condemned for the murders of 16-year-old Elizabeth Pena and her 14-year-old friend, Jennifer Ertman. The girls were gang raped, beaten and strangled in an attack in Houston. Evidence showed the girls had stumbled upon a gang initiation. Cantu was 18 at the time of the slayings. Two of his companions already have been executed. Two others had their sentences commuted to life after the Supreme Court barred the execution of those under 18 at the time of their crimes. www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6965461.html Good, after the behavior in the orginal trial, lets see how cocky and smartass the attitute is, at execution time?
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 19, 2010 13:44:46 GMT -6
Here is a question I do not immediately know the answer to: Hood committed his crime and was initially sentenced to death before LWOP was an option in Texas. Now LWOP is an option. At his new sentencing hearing, the jury will seemingly have to decide between life with the possibility of parole or death. What I am wondering is whether, if the state and Hood both agreed to it, LWOP could be an option even though it was unavailable at the the time of the offense. Can they give him LWOP since there was no LWOP option at that time? No. My question was whether both sides could agree to it though. I think Mike5 is right in that they could not. I discussed this issue years ago with Anony+ (Alison), and she thought maybe they could if both sides agreed to it. She is a lawyer who litigated death penalty appeals for the state of Georgia, and she did not know off hand but thought they possibly could if both sides stipulated. But Mike5's answer above makes the most sense.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Apr 19, 2010 14:06:27 GMT -6
Why do I feel like even if both sides agreed to it, that somehow, somewhere someone would appeal it because he or she felt it was unjust?
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 19, 2010 14:18:01 GMT -6
Why do I feel like even if both sides agreed to it, that somehow, somewhere someone would appeal it because he or she felt it was unjust? I don't know who would have standing to appeal it. A person generally can't appeal another person's sentence. If both sides agreed and the court approved, who is left to appeal? Only Hood would remain to appeal, and he would probably be procedurally defaulted. However, Mike5 is correct that it would likely be an illegal sentence and the court would reject it as such. It is an interesting question though.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Apr 19, 2010 16:51:44 GMT -6
Why do I feel like even if both sides agreed to it, that somehow, somewhere someone would appeal it because he or she felt it was unjust? I don't know who would have standing to appeal it. A person generally can't appeal another person's sentence. If both sides agreed and the court approved, who is left to appeal? Only Hood would remain to appeal, and he would probably be procedurally defaulted. However, Mike5 is correct that it would likely be an illegal sentence and the court would reject it as such. It is an interesting question though. Let's say Hood agreed and then later on decided he didn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison. I envision some do-gooder to take his case because LWOP didn't exist when he was first sentenced.
|
|
|
Post by unkelremus on Apr 20, 2010 5:29:18 GMT -6
Zippidy-do-dah-day--Texas has done it today.....These Air-Wasters....need to go.......
|
|
gillypod
Old Hand
PRO-DP Scot. PTO hates me - I am blessed
Posts: 596
|
Post by gillypod on Apr 30, 2010 13:55:20 GMT -6
Cantu's date has now been set - August 17th 2010 - let's all do the happy dance
|
|