Death Penalty

Sullivan & Cromwell’s Life-or-Death Mistake?
Leading law firm blows deadline in death penalty case.

By

Sullivan Cromwell LLP new logo Sullcrom.jpgMore than a decade ago, Cory Maples of Alabama murdered two people. After an evening of heavy drinking, playing pool, and riding around in a friend’s car, Maples killed two friends, shooting them execution-style.

According to court documents, he signed a confession, “stating that he: (1) shot both victims around midnight; (2) had drunk six or seven beers by about 8 p.m., but ‘didn’t feel very drunk’; and (3) did not know why he decided to kill the two men. Faced with this confession, Maples’s trial attorneys argued that Maples was guilty of murder, but not capital murder.”

A jury found Maples guilty and sentenced him to death.

Maples appealed his capital murder conviction with the help of attorneys at Sullivan & Cromwell:

Maples subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief pursuant to Alabama Rule of Criminal Procedure 32, claiming, inter alia, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate or present evidence of: (1) Maples’s mental health history; (2) his intoxication at the time of the crime; and (3) his alcohol and drug history.

The trial court dismissed Maples’ Rule 32 petition, and sent notice of the decision to the attorneys at Sullivan & Cromwell and to local Alabama counsel. There was a 42-day period for filing a notice of appeal, but all the lawyers involved dropped the ball on the case, PepsiCo-style.

So what’s the explanation for S&C’s missing the deadline for filing an appeal?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Sullivan & Cromwell’s Life-or-Death Mistake?
Leading law firm blows deadline in death penalty case.“

Sign up for the Above the Law newsletter

Subscribe to our free daily email and get breaking news, commentary, and opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and more.

Professor Dershowitz’s Challenge to Justice Scalia

By

alan dershowitz.jpgOn Monday, the Supreme Court ordered a federal trial judge to take a closer look at the murder case against Troy Anthony Davis, a Georgia death row inmate. The SCOTUS directed the district judge to “receive testimony and make findings of fact as to whether evidence that could have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes [Davis'] innocence.”
Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented. Justice Scalia questioned the viability of Davis’s claim of actual innocence, then went one step further. Even if Davis might be “actually” innocent, he’s SOL:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is “actually” innocent.

This bold pronouncement caught the attention of Professor Alan Dershowitz, back at Justice Scalia’s alma mater, Harvard Law School. From “Scalia’s Catholic Betrayal,” over at The Daily Beast:

Let us be clear precisely what [Scalia's dissent] means. If a defendant were convicted, after a constitutionally unflawed trial, of murdering his wife, and then came to the Supreme Court with his very much alive wife at his side, and sought a new trial based on newly discovered evidence (namely that his wife was alive), these two justices would tell him, in effect: “Look, your wife may be alive as a matter of fact, but as a matter of constitutional law, she’s dead, and as for you, Mr. Innocent Defendant, you’re dead, too, since there is no constitutional right not to be executed merely because you’re innocent.”

It would be shocking enough for any justice of the Supreme Court to issue such a truly outrageous opinion, but it is particularly indefensible for Justices Scalia and Thomas, both of whom claim to be practicing Catholics, bound by the teaching of their church, to do moral justice. Justice Scalia has famously written, in the May 2002 issue of the conservative journal First Things, that if the Constitution compelled him to do something that was absolutely prohibited by mandatory Catholic rules, he would have no choice but to resign from the Supreme Court.

So should Justice Scalia resign? The Dersh isn’t saying that — yet.
But he does have a challenge for Nino.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Professor Dershowitz’s Challenge to Justice Scalia”

Morning Docket 6.01.09

By

cars2.jpg* A dramatic closer look at Wolf Block’s collapse. [Philadelphia Magazine]
* The media buzz this week on Sotomayor: Her decision in the New Haven firefighters case could be a key issue during her confirmation hearings. [USA Today]
* Minnesota’s Supreme Court will hear arguments today in the Coleman–Franken election race. Yes, it is still going on. [Wall Street Journal]
* GM files for bankruptcy today. Wasn’t it always just a matter of time? [Associated Press]
* U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Arthur Gonzalez has approved Chrysler’s sale of most of its business to Fiat. [Bloomberg]
* A Georgia man is facing execution for murdering an off-duty cop in 1989, even though seven out of the nine witnesses have recanted their testimony. Should SCOTUS intervene? [New York Times]

Death Row Inmate Wants to be on Florida Supreme Court

By

Mike Lambrix Supreme Court candidate.jpgOne thing that has become clear to me since I started at ATL is that people in prison have a lot of time on their hands. A lot of time. We regularly receive handwritten letters from pro se litigants complaining that the judge who sent them to prison is “above the law.”

Michael Lambrix has been held on death row for over 25 years. Now, he wants to serve on the Florida Supreme Court. “Mike” describes himself on his website (doinglifeondeathrow.com) like this:

Born and raised in Marin County, CA I have now been held hostage on Florida’s death row over 25 years….

My spiritual faith and a healthy (if not a bit twisted) sense of humor have been my strength while the hope of spending time with my 3 children and grandson is my goal….

By nature I am easy going, hard to anger, and quick to forgive – even to a fault. Although spiritual by nature, I’ve grown disgusted by organized religion. For the same reasons I’m disgusted by organized politics — both have become institutions corrupted by man’s arrogance and greed.

Who better to deal with man’s arrogance and greed than a humble convicted felon? It makes sense to Mike. In his application to fill a vacancy on Florida’s highest court, Mike makes his best (handwritten) case:

I would now request that I be considered for nomination and in all fairness I would ask that you do not so quickly discount my genuine desire to become a Justice on the Florida Supreme Court. As a longtime (albeit involuntary!) citizen of the state of Florida I believe I am entitled to due consideration, and the following facts show that I am uniquely qualified to be a Justice on the court.

As for that pesky capital offense?

Of course, I do understand… there would be a predictable measure of reservation to my appointment, but to hell with the public. It’s the governor’s providence to appoint anyone he so chooses, and if the narrow minded public doesn’t like it, they can always vote me off the court in 6 years when I come up for a “retention vote.”

Before you “quickly discount” Mike’s appointment, give due consideration to the fact that we are talking about the state of Florida.

Read Mike’s full application, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Death Row Inmate Wants to be on Florida Supreme Court”

Morning Docket: 02.01.08

By

* NFL Union president prepared for strike. [ESPN]
* Microsoft offers to acquire Yahoo for $44.6 billion to compete with Google. [MSNBC]
* Times reporter subpoenaed over “State of War” source. [New York Times]
* French President and supermodel girlfriend sue over pictures. [Washington Post via WSJ Law Blog]
* HLS grad Obama and YLS grad Clinton make nice, sort of, during debate. [MSNBC]
* SCOTUS stays Alabama execution, maintaining de facto moratorium on death penalty. [CNN]
* Roy Tolles and Arthur Kramer, of Munger Tolles and Kramer Levin, respectively, RIP. [WSJ Law Blog]

Judge of the Day: Hilton Fuller

By

Hilton Fuller Judge Hilton Fuller Brian Nichols Above the Law blog.jpgThis has been all over the news. We like the ABA Journal’s version, ’cause it’s the crispest:

The Atlanta judge overseeing the prosecution of alleged courthouse shooter Brian Nichols has stepped aside from the case after he was quoted [in a New Yorker article] as saying, “Everyone in the world knows he did it.”

The New Yorker piece was by one of our idols, prosecutor-turned-writer Jeffrey Toobin (who launched our blogging career, with this Talk of the Town piece). Judge Fuller and Jeff Toobin were interviewed by the Fulton County Daily Report about the controversy:

“I had a specific agreement with Toobin,” said Fuller on Tuesday, before announcing his recusal. “Our conversation was to be on background only, and there would be no direct quotations or attributions, unless they were floated by me first.”

Not so, said Toobin, reached in New York. “I don’t know what to say,” he said. “I mean, it was clearly for attribution; we even had a New Yorker fact-checker call and confirm it. … I have great respect for Judge Fuller, but that was not at all my understanding.”

We’re with the meticulous Toobin on this one. In fact, we share the suspicion of one of the correspondents who wrote us about this story: Was Judge Fuller’s indiscretion intentional? Was it his way of getting out from under a long and complex nightmare of a case?
Judge Recuses From Courthouse Shooting Case Due to New Yorker Quotes [ABA Journal]
Judge Fuller recuses from Nichols case [Fulton County Daily Report]
Judge in Courthouse Shooting Case Steps Down [New York Times]
Death in Georgia [The New Yorker]
New Yorker Quote Leads to Atlanta Judge Recusal [WSJ Law Blog]

Morning Docket: 12.14.07

By

* So, it’s gonna be illegal now, which means the CIA can’t do it, right? [Washington Post via How Appealing]
* New Jersey gets rid of the death penalty; now if they could just tackle that disgusting odor. [BBC]
* Prosecutors go 0-1-6 in Sears Tower trial. [CNN]
* Hey, look everybody! International law! They’ve got a court with judges and lawyers and stuff, and they even issue rulings! Just like it’s real! That’s cute. ICJ upholds treaty giving islands to Colombia. [Jurist]
* Hollywood writers take this strike thing up a notch. [AP via Reno Gazette-Journal]

Does the Death Penalty Save Lives? Apparently So

By

syringe lethal injection death penalty Above the Law legal tabloid.jpg[Although legal in nature, this story is not typical ATL fare -- it's a bit too, well, substantive. But we suspect that some of you will have strong opinions on it. So we're tossing it out for discussion, in the hopes of inspiring a comment clusterf**k.]
Does the death penalty serve as an effective deterrent to murder? Up until now, we’ve generally subscribed to the liberal view that its deterrence value is questionable. But a fascinating article by one of our favorite legal reporters, Yale Law grad Adam Liptak — who writes for the New York Times, no conservative hack publication — raises some interesting questions:

For the first time in a generation, the question of whether the death penalty deters murders has captured the attention of scholars in law and economics, setting off an intense new debate about one of the central justifications for capital punishment.

According to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented.

The effect is most pronounced, according to some studies, in Texas and other states that execute condemned inmates relatively often and relatively quickly.

Check out this quote:

“I personally am opposed to the death penalty,” said H. Naci Mocan, an economist at Louisiana State University and an author of a study finding that each execution saves five lives. “But my research shows that there is a deterrent effect.”

More after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Does the Death Penalty Save Lives? Apparently So”

Morning Docket: 11.16.07

By

* Judge Mark Filip (N.D. Ill.) picked to be Mukasey’s deputy. [AP via How Appealing]
* SCOTUS stays Florida execution like I said they would. [New York Times]
* Hmm…Bush administration didn’t properly consider impact of climate change…. shocking. [New York Times; Washington Post]
* Hillary Clinton takes the gloves off, giving “her most commanding performance to date” in last night’s debate. [The Atlantic (Marc Ambinder)]

Morning Docket: 10.31.07

By

staph infection staphylococcus Above the Law blog.jpg* Family to sue NYC over staph death. [CNN]
* Nader sues DNC for trying to win 2004 Presidential election conspiring against him in 2004. [AP via Breitbart]
* Should law school be more like business school? [WSJ Law Blog]
* Georgia to $336,000 in child support! [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]
* Yep, de facto moratorium. [New York Times]

Morning Docket: 10.30.07

By

* The war on punitive damages continues. [USA Today via How Appealing]
* Suspect from Burning Man burning to burn something else. [Reno Gazette-Journal]
* Senators want clarification from Mukasey on waterboarding. [Jurist]
* Lerach pleads guilty. [Los Angeles Times]
* Do we have a de facto moratorium on executions pending this term’s SCOTUS lethal injection case? We should find out today. [New York Times]

Morning Docket: 10.18.07

By

* Clarence Darrow? How cliche. Anywho, this guy is now a New Mexico Supreme Court justice. [Albuquerque Journal (free trial pass required) and New Mexico Business Weekly, via How Appealing]
* Step 1: Stop killing monks. [Jurist]
* Death for the death penalty? [New York Times]
* Latham lawyer DQ’ed in KPMG trial. [WSJ Law Blog]
* Thomas in the ATL. [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]