New Mexico Saves Money • Texas Inmate • Legislative Activity • Justice Resigned • Abolition in New Mexico • New Mexico Legislature • Jimmy Carter • Kansas Examines Death Penalty • Maryland Senate • Ohio Death Penalty Case

New Mexico to Save Money After Abolition of Death Penalty

A cost assessment prepared for the New Mexico legislature prior to its vote on repealing the death penalty indicated some of the money that would be saved if the bill was passed. The state will save several million dollars each year, according to the fiscal impact report by the Public Defender Department. For example, in the case of State v. Young, the public defender office expended $1.7 million. They estimated that the total cost to the state would be three times that much when the costs to the prosecution and to the courts are factored in. In the end, the state Supreme Court barred the state from pursuing the death penalty further because insufficient resources were being provided for the defense.
Citing just one part of the death penalty process, jury selection, the report noted, "Jury selection is a long, arduous process that potentially touches on the constitutional and religious rights of New Mexicans, and costs at least four times as much as a non-death first-degree murder case."
back to top

Texas Court Rejects Appeal Calling Inmate "Crazy" but "Sane"

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recently ruled that a death row inmate who removed his only remaining eye and ate it “is clearly ‘crazy,’ but he is also ‘sane’ under Texas law,” rejecting his appeal. Death row inmate Andre Thomas had stabbed some of his family members and ripped their hearts out. He then walked into the Sherman Police Department, admitted to the killings, and said God told him to commit them. Shortly after his arrest, he removed his right eye in 2004. In December 2008, a death row officer found Thomas with a bloody face and it was determined that he had removed his left eye and eaten it. Thomas had been to hospitals twice prior to his arrest for mental health issues, but had not received treatment. Judge Cathy Cochran, writing for the court, said, "This is an extraordinarily tragic case,'' because the deaths could have been avoided if Thomas had been treated.
back to top

Recent Legislative Activity on the Death Penalty

March 17, 2009

Many states are considering bills to abolish, reform, or expand the death penalty during current legislative sessions. Some recent developments include: New Mexico’s bill to abolish the death penalty passed the House and Senate and is awaiting Gov. Richardson's decision and signature, likely to come on March 18. In Colorado, a bill to abolish the death penalty and use the resources to pursue cold cases passed the House Judiciary Committee 7-4. In Kansas, the bill to abolish the death penalty passed the Senate Judiciary Committee 6-5, but the Senate voted to return the bill for further study. In Maryland, the bill to abolish the death penalty went to the full Senate where an amendment was passed to keep the death penalty but to require a higher standard of proof for guilt in capital cases. That amended bill is being considered by the House on March 17. Montana’s bill to abolish the death penalty passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, passed the Senate 27-23, and faces a House Judiciary Committee hearing March 25. A bill in Utah to allow the legislature to restrict death penalty appeals failed in the House.
back to top

State Supreme Court Justice Resigned Over the Death Penalty

Retired Washington State Supreme Court Justice Robert F. Utter recently wrote an opinion piece arguing that the continued use of the death penalty fails to serve justice, public safety or the public purse — and should be abandoned. Justice Utter resigned from the high court after 23 years in 1995 because of his concerns about the death penalty. Justice Utter wrote recently in the Seattle Times, “My original reasons for resignation still apply. I then stated: ‘I believe society has a right to protect itself by imposing life sentences without the possibility of parole. However, it became obvious that there were certain inherent contradictions that made unfairness and discrimination not merely uncontrollable accessories of the punishment of death, but its very essence.’
Read the full op-ed: Washington State Must Abandon the Death Penalty
back to top

New Mexico Governor Nixon signs Abolition into Law

On Wednesday March 18th, governor Nixon of New Mexico signed legislation abolishing the death penalty in New Mexico! The repeal takes effect on July 1, and applies only to crimes committed after that date. New Mexico becomes only the second state after New Jersey to ban executions since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. There are now 15 states in the US that do not use the death penalty. Thank you so much if you wrote in or called governor Nixon. This could not have happened without the hard work of abolition activists like you.
back to top

New Mexico Legislature Votes to Repeal the Death Penalty

The New Mexico Senate voted on March 13 to repeal the death penalty and replace it with a sentence of life without parole. The vote was 24-18. The House of Representatives had previously voted in favor of repeal. The bill will now go to New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson for his signature. He has not announced whether he will sign the bill, but has indicated a new openness to the repeal effort. Many victims' families members in New Mexico had supported the repeal.
If signed into law, New Mexico would become the 15th state to abandon capital punishment. New York and New Jersey ended the death penalty in 2007.

Governor Richardson's office has set up a hotline to receive opinions, from anyone in any state, on this issue. That number is 505-476-2225. You will not be asked for your name or address, simply leave a message about why you support repeal. This is tremendously important as Gov. Richardson has indicated he may or may not sign the repeal bill.
back to top

Jimmy Carter Urges New Mexico Governor to Support Death Penalty Repeal

Former President Jimmy Carter wrote New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson to encourage him to support a bill repealing the death penalty and replacing it with life in prison without parole. "We encourage your support for this comprehensive and visionary approach," Carter wrote. In addition to pointing out how the extra money spent on capital punishment could be better used elsewhere, Carter wrote, "As you know, the United States is one of the few countries, along with nations such as Saudi Arabia, China, and Cuba, which still carry out the death penalty despite the ongoing tragedy of wrongful conviction and gross racial and class-based disparities that make impossible the fair implementation of this ultimate punishment.”
Read the entire article: Jimmy Carter writes to NM gov about death penalty
back to top

Kansas Examines Death Penalty Costs

Senator Carolyn McGinn of Kansas recently published an op-ed calling for an end to the death penalty because it is too costly and does not benefit the people. Sen. McGinn, a Republican from Sedgwick, is the sponsor of a bill that would replace the death penalty with a sentence of life without parole. She explained that in light of the state’s budget deficit, Kansas is looking at ways to reduce government spending. “One policy change being considered is whether the death penalty is worth its higher cost to Kansas citizens, versus the alternative sentence of life in prison without parole we now have on the books,” she wrote. She pointed to a Kansas legislative report that found "the estimated median cost of a case in which the death sentence was given was about 70% more than the median cost of a non-death penalty murder case.”
To read Sen McGinn's article: Death Penalty Too Costly, Not a Deterrent
back to top

Support for Death Penalty Has Dropped in North Carolina

In a recent opinion poll conducted by Elon University in North Carolina, less than half of those polled believe that the the death penalty is the “most appropriate punishment for first degree murder.” When the same question was asked in 2005, 61% chose the death penalty as the appropriate sentence. In 2009, that number had dropped to 48%, the same percentage recorded in the University's 2007 poll. "I would imagine the difference in opinion on our surveys is somewhat attributable to a realization among the public of the fallibility of the process or system, or at least an increased awareness about those cases in which people convicted of crimes and serving sentences were later exonerated," said pollster Hunter Bacot. About 39% said life in prison without parole would be the better punishment in 2009, an increase from the 27% who supported that option in 2005.
back to top

MD Senate Reaches Compromise on Death Penalty

On March 4, the Maryland Senate reached a compromise on a death penalty repeal bill by amending the bill so as to restrict capital prosecutions. The proposed revision to the state’s death penalty statute would preclude murder cases where the only evidence is eyewitness testimony and, in turn, require DNA evidence, videotaped evidence, or a voluntary videotaped confession. Sen. Jamie Raskin, a Montgomery County Democrat and proponent of death penalty repeal, said his support of the Senate compromise came with mixed emotions. Raskin said senators did not pay enough attention to the work of a governor-appointed bipartisan commission that carefully studied the state's death penalty. That commission, headed by former U.S. Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti, recommended abolishing the death penalty because of its racial and geographical disparities, the risk of executing an innocent person, and its high costs.
back to top

Supreme Court Agrees to Review Ohio Death Penalty Case

In Smith v. Spisak, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed for a second time to review questions of jury instructions presented during the penalty phase and ineffective assistance of counsel at the defendant's trial. Frank Spisak was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of three people at Cleveland State University in 1982. While the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted habeas corpus relief, thereby vacating Spisak’s death sentence. The Sixth Circuit held the judge's sentencing instructions were improper because they suggested to the jury that unanimity had to be reached on individual mitigating factors and that the defendant had to be unanimously acquitted of the death sentence before a life sentence could be imposed. Additionally, the Sixth Circuit ruled that defense counsel had been constitutionally ineffective during penalty-phase closing arguments, making inappropriate statements about the defendant that may have impacted the outcome of the sentencing decision.
back to top

upcoming events