The Death Penalty in 2024

Anne Holsinger  0:01

Hello and welcome to 1201: The Death Penalty in Context. I’m Anne Holsinger, Managing Director of the Death Penalty Information Center. In this episode, I’ll be speaking with DPI’s Communications Associate, Hayley Bedard about our 2024 year end report and some significant trends in the death penalty. Thanks for joining me, Hayley.

Hayley Bedard  0:20

Happy to be here, Anne.

Anne Holsinger  0:20

Before we begin our discussion of the year end report, we wanted to note that our podcast has a new name, beginning with this episode. Over the last several months, the Death Penalty Information Center has refreshed our website and logo, and we’re also shifting from using the shortened name DPIC to the acronym DPI. Our new podcast name shares an inspiration with our new logo. Both refer to the traditional time when executions were held—just after midnight in complete secrecy. So now we can go ahead and jump in to our discussion of the report. So Hayley, why don’t we start with what some of the key findings were of this year’s year end report.

Hayley Bedard  0:55

Sure. In 2024 the number of new death sentences increased from 2023 with 26 new death sentences, and the number of people on death row across the US has continued to decline year by year since 2000. Public support for the death penalty remains at a historic low, actually over the past couple of decades, and fewer people found the death penalty morally acceptable this year than last year. There was significant media attention and support from unlikely allies in a bunch of cases across the country, particularly in the cases of Marcellus Williams in Missouri, Robert Roberson in Texas, and Richard Glossop in Oklahoma. In the end of December, President Biden, former President Biden, commuted death sentences of 37 men on federal death row, and just a day before leaving office in North Carolina, former Governor Roy Cooper commutted the death sentences of 15 men. There was a bunch of death penalty related legislation enacted in at least six states this year that limited the use of the death penalty, altered execution methods or protocols, modified procedures or increased secrecy. Abolition efforts continued in more than a dozen states, and efforts to reintroduce the death penalty failed in eight states. This year, we reached the 1600th execution in the modern death penalty era in September 2024 with the execution of Alan Miller in Alabama. The number of people executed this year remains nearly the same as last year, with 25 executions taking place in nine different states. This year, Alabama became the first state to use nitrogen gas and Utah, South Carolina, and Indiana conducted their first executions after more than a decade. The death penalty has been abolished in practice or in law in a majority of the countries around the world, 144 and 2024 saw legal abolition efforts across four more countries. 

Anne Holsinger  2:41

Thanks for that summary you mentioned at the beginning some of the public opinion polling that took place this year. The 2024 Gallup poll found that support for the death penalty remained near historic lows, with just 53% of Americans saying that they support the death penalty. One of the most intriguing finds, though, was that there is a growing generational divide on the issue. Millennials and Generation Z, that is, people who are 18 to 43, are much less likely to support the death penalty than members of Generation X, Baby boomers and the Silent Generation. Why are younger people, especially members of Gen Z, so opposed to the death penalty?

Hayley Bedard  3:20

Yeah, according to Gallup’s findings, the younger generations, Gen Z and the millennials, have been exposed to issues with the death penalty, particularly as many states currently have moratoriums on the death penalty or have completely abolished capital punishment in the last decade or so. A lot of these efforts were motivated by high profile innocence cases, which is what Gallup cites as a major cause for this lack of support in the younger generations.

Anne Holsinger  3:46

Yeah, you mentioned innocence cases, and those were a major focus of death penalty news. Last year, three new exonerations brought the total number of death row exonerations to 200 but beyond that milestone, though, there were several cases of prisoners with significant innocence claims that made news this year. Could you tell us a little bit about some of those cases and the commonalities that linked them?

Hayley Bedard  4:08

The case of Marcellus Williams is one in particular that caught a lot of public attention. Mr. Williams was sentenced to death in the state of Missouri for the 1998 murder of a newspaper journalist, and Mr. Williams received unique support from the sitting prosecuting attorney Wesley Bell. In January of 2024, PA Bell filed a motion to vacate Mr. Williams’ death sentence after DNA testing excluded him as a source of the DNA on the murder weapon. Later in the year, in August, as an evidentiary hearing was about to begin, PA Bell’s office announced that the murder weapon actually contained the DNA of members of the trial prosecution team, which is an indication that the evidence had been mishandled and contaminated and could no longer be used to conclusively prove that Mr. Williams was innocent. After that announcement, his— Mr. Williams attorneys and Mr. Bell’s members of his office—they entered an agreement to have an Alford plea in exchange for a life sentence without parole. So this agreement would acknowledge that Mr. Williams understands that the state has enough evidence to prosecute him, but he still maintains his innocence. That plea agreement was eventually blocked by sitting Attorney General at the time, Andrew Bailey, and he asked the Missouri State Supreme Court to intervene, and they did so. Judge Hilton, who was the judge on Mr. Williams case, denied motion to move with the scheduled hearing, and allowed for Mr. Williams conviction to stand. At this point, there were more than a 1.5 million people on social media who were asking the Governor, Mike Parson, to grant clemency for Mr. Williams because of the lack of success at the, in the court systems. Ultimately, Governor Parson didn’t grant clemency to Mr. Williams, and he was executed in September despite the protests of these more than 1.5 million people. Similarly to Mr. Williams, there’s a case in Oklahoma with that of Richard Glossip. He is, was sentenced to death in the early 2000s for the hiring of killing of his boss at a motel. The individual who confessed to killing his boss implicated Mr. Gossip as hiring him to do so. There’s now been questions of the validity of the individual who testified against Mr. Gossip statements, and they’ve questioned his mental health and records now show that he was under the influence of medications at the time of his trial, and the defense was not aware of this information. Because of revelation of a bunch of new evidence in Mr. Gossip case, sitting AG Gentner Drummond has supported Mr. Gossip’srequest for a new trial and other Oklahoma legislators have also supported this request for a new trial, despite their belief and support of the death penalty. Mr. Gossip’s case was heard in the Supreme Court at the end of last year to determine whether or not they have the authority to go ahead with a new sentencing. Another major innocence case that took up a lot of space in the news this year was that of Mr. Robert Roberson in Texas. Mr. Roberson was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his two year old daughter, Nikki. At trial, prosecutors argued that she died from Shaken Baby Syndrome, which is a medical theory that holds a certain symptoms in young children can only be caused by abuse. This theory has since been debunked, and medical experts now believe that Nikki died from severe and viral and bacterial pneumonia that were failed to be diagnosed in combination with an accidental fall and improper medications. Despite new evidence showing that this, that no crime ever occurred, the Texas court system has refused to grant Mr. Roberson any relief. He was scheduled for execution in October, and just the night before his scheduled execution, the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence issued a subpoena for Mr. Roberson to testify on a date after his scheduled execution. Because of the subpoena, Mr. Roberson’s scheduled execution date was called into question, and it was eventually stayed by a district court. The Texas AG’s office challenged this, but ultimately the Texas Supreme Court stepped in and paused Mr. Roberson’s execution. They eventually ruled that the legislature does not have the authority to intervene in a scheduled execution with subpoena, but that they are allowed to subpoena incarcerated individuals. And lastly, there’s another case in Texas, that of Melissa Lucio. She was sentenced to death for the death of her two year old daughter, Mariah. The prosecutors claim that Mariah’s injuries were caused by abuse, but Ms. Lucio maintained her innocence and persisted that Mariah was injured in an accidental fall. New medical evidence and expert testimony corroborates that story and a 2022 clemency campaign garnered great bipartisan support from nearly 90 Texas legislators and groups of domestic violence advocates and medical experts. This year, in November, it was publicly announced that trial Judge Arturo Nelson agreed and signed a fact finding of facts and conclusions and stated that Ms Lucio is actually innocent and she did not kill her daughter.

Anne Holsinger  9:28

Thank you for sharing all of those cases. The report also covers the issue of clemency. Initially it looked like there might not be any grants of clemency in 2024 but that changed right at the end of the year, on December 23 when President Joe Biden took the remarkable step of commuting 37 of the 40 federal death sentences to life without parole. Just days later, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper granted 15 commutations to people on his state’s death row. How do these decisions fit into broader trends and patterns around clemency grants? 

Hayley Bedard  10:03

In the report that we released earlier this year, Lethal Election, we found that individual grants of clemency are more likely to occur when an executive is not up for re-election, and that is an even higher number when the executive has the sole authority to grant clemency, as is the case with President Biden. So knowing that both President Biden and Governor Cooper were not running for reelection, that they could not take office, it follows the trend that elected officials are more likely to grant clemency when they are in a lame duck position. 

Anne Holsinger  10:35

While we’re on the subject of data and trends, let’s talk about the key numbers from the 2024 report this year, for the 10th consecutive year, fewer than 50 people were sentenced to death, and fewer than 30 were executed. What factors influenced who received death sentences this year?

Hayley Bedard  10:51

There are quite a few factors with which people received death sentences this year. Particularly geography was very important. There were only 10 states that imposed death sentences this year, Florida imposed the most new death sentences with seven. Texas imposed six, Alabama, four, California, three and Arizona, Idaho, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio and Tennessee each had one new death sentence. Specifically in Florida, six out of the seven new death sentences had non unanimous verdicts. Non unanimous Florida juries began returning death sentences in 2023 after the state adopted legislation at the request of Governor Ron DeSantis. Florida now has the nation’s lowest threshold for death sentences, requiring just eight out of 12 jurors to agree to impose the dea, death sentences. Overall, a third of those in death sentences this year were non unanimous. That is six in Florida and three in Alabama. Alabama requires at least 10 juror to agree for in favor of a death sentence. It’s also largely based on race. The majority of those sentenced to death in 2024 were identified as white 12 defendants, or 46% there were 10 Black defendants or 38% and the remaining were two Latino defendants, one Asian defendant and one Native American defendant. 54% of defendants sentenced to death in 2024 were people of color and all identified as men, almost a third of those sentenced to death in 2024—eight individuals—were considered emerging adults, with two of them 19 years old at the time of the crime. Age largely had a factor in this as well, as well as the race of the victim, there were 46 victims in capital cases that resulted in death sentence in 2024—28 of those victims were female and 17 were male, one with as a fetal victim, and among the victims, 54% were white, followed by 22% Latino and 15% Black and 12% Asian.

Anne Holsinger  12:57

What patterns did you see in 2024 as executions?

Hayley Bedard  13:00  

Trends in execution numbers were very similar to the trends in new death sentences. Just nine states carried out executions in 2024 and four states were responsible for 76% of those executions. A majority of the executions were carried out in the US South, which is consistent with historical trends. All but one individual executed this year suffered from a vulnerability that would make them ineligible for the death penalty under current laws and norms, whether that be severe mental illness, intellectual disability. And the individuals in 2024 spent, on average, more than 20 years on death row. And there were three states this year that restarted executions for the first time after over a decade of pause in executions, Utah carried out its first execution in 14 years in August, when it executed Taberon Honie. South Carolina carried out two executions in 2024 after a 13 year pause, and Indiana carried out an execution in December 2024 for the first time after 15 year hiatus. Idaho attempted to resume executions after 12 year hiatus, but had to call of the execution of Thomas Creech when executioners were unable to establish an IV line after several attempts to do so.

Anne Holsinger  14:16

Before we move on to our next topic, I just want to emphasize something that you said about the trends in executions, which is that most of the people who were executed this year would be unlikely to receive a death sentence if they were facing trial today. The average time from sentencing to execution was about 22 years, and so the people who were executed this year really are reflecting the laws and norms that were in place 22 years ago, and there have been significant changes in representation and the quality of attorneys that are offered to people facing death sentences. There has been a huge development in the ability to present mitigating evidence that can sway a jury to impose a sentence less than death. And of course, there’s been a lot of change in public opinion. You know, 20 years ago, public support for the death penalty was much higher than it is today. I just want to emphasize that really, the executions that we saw in 2024 are not reflecting societal attitudes about the death penalty as they are currently, but rather as they were more than two decades ago.

Hayley Bedard  15:27

That would be correct, absolutely. Executions are definitely a lagging indicator of public support and what the public actually feels about the death penalty. New death sentences handed down yearly is definitely a more accurate representation of public opinion.

Anne Holsinger  15:44

So let’s move on to the last major section of the report, which focused on the US Supreme Court. This year, we found that the US Supreme Court has largely abandoned its role as the court of last resort for those sentenced to death in 2024 death sentence prisoners sought review or stays 148 times, and the court granted only three of those requests. How has this shift affected people on death row?

Hayley Bedard  16:11

Yeah this the shift in the Supreme Court’s role has absolutely affected people on death row. It has been much more difficult for them to obtain relief in innocence cases and in non-innocence cases, this affects people with due process claims and other constitutional challenges, and one instance of that would be that of Warren King. He was sentenced to death in Georgia and at trial, the prosecutors struck 87.5% of the Black potential jurors and only 8.8% of the white potential jurors. This, this racial striking of jurors is a straightforward violation of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Batson versus Kentucky in 1986 which bars prosecutors from striking jurors based on gender or race. At the time of Mr. King’s trial, the judge found that the strike was racially motivated, and he placed this placed one individual back on the jury, and despite evidence of motive and intent from the prosecutor, the Georgia Supreme Court found that the prosecutors additional strikes of Black individuals were not racially motivated. The 11th Circuit affirmed this decision, and the Supreme Court denied cert and refused to hear the case. At that point, Justices Jackson and Sotomayor dissented and wrote that the Supreme Court should have granted certiori to Mr. King and summarily, summarily reversed his sentence or conviction under Batson. Justice Jackson argued that the Georgia Supreme Court ignored many of the factors regarding the prosecutors admitted discriminatory strikes, and she noted that it’s not an isolated incident of the 11th Circuit’s failure to recognize error quote “reflects a neglectful response to the apparent trend, and disturbingly lacks Batson enforcement.”

Anne Holsinger  16:11

I also want to highlight one of the key quotes that we included in the report, which was also from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in a dissent from denial of cert in Michaels v. Davis. She really, I think, nicely summarized some of the challenges that have come up and the concerns that people have about the erosion of the Supreme Court’s role. She said: courts must be careful to safeguard the rights that our Constitution protects, even when and perhaps especially when, evaluating errors made in cases stemming from a terrible crime. Do you think we’ve missed any other themes or trends that we want to address before we wrap up?

Hayley Bedard  18:38

Yeah, I would just add while the Supreme Court has stepped back in their role, they have stepped in in Mr. Glossip’s case that we mentioned before, and the Supreme Court actually stayed one execution this year, that of Ruben Gutierrez in Texas. The Supreme Court agreed to review his appeal on DNA evidence, and this is one of very few times they’re willing to do so.

Anne Holsinger  19:02

Thank you so much for joining me for this discussion, Hayley, I really appreciate it. 

Hayley Bedard  19:06

Happy to be here, like I said before.

Anne Holsinger  19:07

And thank you to our listeners for joining us today to learn more about the death penalty. You can visit the DPI website at deathpenaltyinfo.org. The 2024 year end report, which we’ve discussed in this episode, can be found under the tab labeled ‘Research.’ And to make sure you never miss an episode of our podcast, you can subscribe to 1201: The Death Penalty in Context, on your podcast app of choice.