Entries by Death Penalty Information Center

Jerry Miller, a for­mer army cook who spent near­ly 25 years behind bars for a crime he did not com­mit, became the nation’s 200^th per­son freed from prison or death row through DNA test­ing. The first DNA exon­er­a­tion in the U.S. took place in 1989. Thirteen years lat­er, the num­ber of freed inmates reached 100, and just five years after that, it doubled. ​“Five years ago, peo­ple said that the num­ber (of exon­er­a­tions) was going to dry up because there just weren’t many wrongful convictions.

Members of an American Bar Association Assessment Team have urged Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen to extend the state’s cur­rent mora­to­ri­um on exe­cu­tions so that a more thor­ough review of the state’s cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment laws can be con­duct­ed. The sev­en-mem­ber team also offered 14 rec­om­men­da­tions to address prob­lems iden­ti­fied dur­ing their review of Tennessee’s death penal­ty. Racial and geo­graph­ic dis­par­i­ties in cap­i­tal cas­es, poor­ly trained defense attor­neys, heavy caseloads for…

A new sci­en­tif­ic study of 41 lethal injec­tions that took place in California and North Carolina dur­ing the past two decades revealed that two of the three drugs used to car­ry out these exe­cu­tions are not admin­is­tered in a way that reli­ably pro­duces death in the way intend­ed. The study, pub­lished in the Public Library of Science Journal, PLoS Medicine, found that inmates were giv­en a uni­form amount of anes­the­sia (sodi­um thiopen­tal) regard­less of their body weight or other…

A Cincinnati Enquirer exam­i­na­tion of death penal­ty deci­sions issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6^th Circuit revealed that judges appear to con­sis­tent­ly vote along par­ty lines, there­by inject­ing arbi­trari­ness into death penal­ty rul­ings. The judges do most of their work as mem­bers of ran­dom­ly select­ed three-judge pan­els. Sixteen judges are eli­gi­ble to sit on those pan­els, includ­ing nine Republican appointees and sev­en Democratic appointees. This means life-and-death…

Three orga­ni­za­tions whose mem­ber­ships include fam­i­ly mem­bers of mur­der vic­tims recent­ly issued a joint state­ment in con­junc­tion with National Crime Victims’ Rights Week, which takes place April 22 — 28, 2007. The state­ment, issued by the lead­ers of Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights, Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation, and Journey of Hope, called for gov­ern­men­tal poli­cies that serve the true needs of fam­i­ly mem­bers. The groups called for an end to the death…

The California Supreme Court has unan­i­mous­ly ruled that a defen­dant may be spared the death penal­ty because he is men­tal­ly defi­cient in one area, even if his IQ score falls in the nor­mal range. The deci­sion gives judges broad­er dis­cre­tion to spare defen­dants from exe­cu­tion for rea­sons of men­tal impair­ment and clar­i­fies a 2005 rul­ing that allowed those on death row to chal­lenge their sen­tences on the grounds of men­tal retar­da­tion. The court ruled that tri­al courts may give…

A Cincinnati Enquirer inves­ti­ga­tion of Ohio cap­i­tal cas­es found that more death sen­tences are over­turned in the state because of mis­takes by defense lawyers than for any oth­er rea­son. Reporters with the Enquirer found that 15 peo­ple on Ohio’s death row won fed­er­al appeals dur­ing the past sev­en years based entire­ly or in part on the poor per­for­mance of their lawyers. ​“It’s a big, big prob­lem. The lawyers don’t have the where­with­al to put on a first-class defense,” observed Judge Gilbert…

Noting that they ​“can­not rec­on­cile the fact that [the death penal­ty] is both imper­fect and irre­versible,” the Dallas Morning News has called on Texas to aban­don cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. The paper, which has long sup­port­ed the death penal­ty, changed its posi­tion after care­ful con­sid­er­a­tion of mount­ing evi­dence that the state has wrong­ly con­vict­ed a num­ber of defen­dants in cap­i­tal tri­als and has like­ly exe­cut­ed at least one man who was inno­cent. The editorial…

On Wednesday, April 18, at 1 PM, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argu­ments in Panetti v. Quarterman. This case focus­es on the ques­tion of whether an inmate must have a ratio­nal under­stand­ing of his crime and why he is being pun­ished pri­or to exe­cu­tion, or whether mere aware­ness of his sit­u­a­tion is suf­fi­cient for men­tal com­pe­ten­cy. For a fuller descrip­tion of the case, see Supreme Court (Pending 2007 cas­es). This page includes links to some of the legal briefs filed…