A fed­er­al judge in Memphis has blocked the exe­cu­tion of Philip Workman (pic­tured), a Tennessee man who has been on death row for more than 20 years despite evi­dence that he did not shoot the vic­tim who was killed. Workman’s exe­cu­tion, sched­uled for September 22, was delayed pend­ing the results of a fed­er­al review of anoth­er Tennessee case that could affect Workman’s lat­est appeals. (New Channel 5 News in Tennessee, September 2, 2004).

Workman was con­vict­ed in 1981 of the mur­der of police offi­cer Ronald Oliver dur­ing the course of a Memphis rob­bery. Workman has nev­er denied his par­tic­i­pa­tion in the rob­bery, but has main­tained that he did not fire the shot that fatal­ly wound­ed Oliver. Since Workman’s tri­al, the state’s key wit­ness in the case has recant­ed his tes­ti­mo­ny, say­ing he had lied on the stand. In addi­tion, bal­lis­tics evi­dence has cast doubt on the asser­tion that Workman’s gun was the weapon used to mur­der Oliver. Based on this evi­dence, five of the jurors who sen­tenced Workman to die have since signed affi­davits stat­ing they would not have sen­tenced Workman to death had they heard all of the evi­dence that emerged fol­low­ing his con­vic­tion. When the Tennessee Supreme Court reject­ed Workman’s most recent appeal, Justice Adolpho Birch issued a strong dis­sent that not­ed: “(T)he grav­i­ty of this case and the strength of my con­vic­tion con­cern­ing this case dri­ve my response…under any analy­sis, the new-dis­cov­ered proof that an ​‘eye­wit­ness’ no longer claimed to have seen Workman shoot the offi­cer, and that the wound caus­ing death was incon­sis­tent with the type of wound which would have been caused by a bul­let match­ing Workman’s gun, man­dates a con­clu­sion that the evi­dence may have result­ed in a dif­fer­ent judg­ment.” Workman’s exe­cu­tion date was the fifth date he has faced dur­ing his years on death row. A reprieve was grant­ed for his last sched­uled exe­cu­tion because the med­ical exam­in­er in Workman’s case had been indict­ed for fak­ing that he had been abduct­ed by sup­port­ers of Workman. Among those endors­ing clemen­cy for Workman are Oliver’s daugh­ter and the for­mer pros­e­cu­tor of Shelby County, where Workman was tried and con­vict­ed. The for­mer pros­e­cu­tor has also donat­ed his ser­vices as lead coun­sel for Workman’s clemen­cy bid. (See DPIC Press Release, September 15, 2003).

Citation Guide