Florida executed man who stabbed to death daughter, ex-wife, mother-in-law and aunt

The 25th Execution of 2015

Thirty years after he stabbed and killed his five-year-old daughter, his ex-wife and her mother and sister in Florida, Jerry Correll himself was dead as the result of lethal injection, reported the Tampa Bay Times.

The October 29, 2015 execution occurred after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected without comment Correll's request for a stay at 6:40 p.m., 40 minutes after the execution was scheduled.

Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, saying Correll's execution should be delayed while the court decides whether Florida's capital punishment system is constitutional. At issue: In Florida, it takes only a majority of the jury - not a unanimous one as in most states - to recommend a death penalty. Even then, the judge has a final say.

Breyer also said keeping a prisoner on death row for 30 years constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

Correll is the first person to be executed since January in the small, white death chamber. His death was put off in February by the Florida Supreme Court while federal justices considered a case that could rule the state's lethal injections unconstitutional.

That case surrounded midazolam, a highly controversial drug used in lethal injections in just a few states, including Florida. Its purpose is to sedate the inmate, although in some cases it has not worked properly, causing major complications in an otherwise straightforward process.

On Thursday, nothing appeared to go awry.

Correll's execution is also the 22nd to take place in the death chamber at Florida State Prison since Gov. Rick Scott took office in 2011, more than any other governor since the death penalty was reinstated in Florida in 1976. Jeb Bush ordered 21 in his eight years in office and Charlie Crist ordered just five.

"It's his solemn duty to uphold the law and his foremost concern is always for the victims and their families," said Jackie Schutz, Scott's spokeswoman.

Family members of the victims — Susan Correll, Marybeth Jones, Mary Lou Hines and Tuesday Correll — were present, as were Correll's lawyers and a member of clergy.

"The consequences of (Correll's) actions should be no less than death itself," the family of the victims said in a written statement after the execution. "It has taken a long time for his punishment to be fulfilled, but we have chosen to use that time to heal and move forward."

The family of death row inmates aren't allowed to witness executions. Correll spoke with his daughter on the phone Thursday morning, however, and she and other family members visited him last week, Department of Corrections spokesman McKinley Lewis said.

On Thursday, Correll had a two-hour meeting with Deacon Jason Roy, a Catholic chaplain who serves death row inmates. Around 10 a.m., he ate his last meal: a cheeseburger, french fries and a Coke.

"His general demeanor has been calm and in good spirits today," Lewis said.

Judge Kozinski: Eyewitness identification

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Alex Kozinski — has recently published an article in the Georgetown Law Journal providing 12 reasons we should worry about the criminal justice system. His former law clerk and blogger Eugene Volokh has serialized the article for the Washington Post.  Periodically, I will share Judge Kozinski's concerns with the criminal justice system, through the analysis of Mr. Volokh.

I have shared similar concerns through this blog.  I will provide links to my commentary as well.

1. Eyewitnesses are highly reliable. This belief is so much part of our culture that one often hears talk of a “mere” circumstantial case as contrasted to a solid case based on eyewitness testimony. In fact, research shows that eyewitness identifications are highly unreliable, especially where the witness and the perpetrator are of different races. Eyewitness reliability is further compromised when the identification occurs under the stress of a violent crime, an accident or catastrophic event — which pretty much covers all situations where identity is in dispute at trial. In fact, mistaken eyewitness testimony was a factor in more than a third of wrongful conviction cases. Yet, courts have been slow in allowing defendants to present expert evidence on the fallibility of eyewitnesses; many courts still don’t allow it. Few, if any, courts instruct juries on the pitfalls of eyewitness identification or caution them to be skeptical of eyewitness testimony.

Here is my take in 2011 in the Pennsylvania Law Weekly

At least 300 veterans on death row nationwide

Approximately 300 veterans are on death row today, and many others have already been executed, suggests a report by the Death Penalty Information Center.
Perhaps even more surprising, when many of these veterans faced death penalty trials, their service and related illnesses were barely touched on as their lives were being weighed by judges and juries.
Defense attorneys failed to investigate this critical area of mitigation; prosecutors dismissed, or even belittled, their claims of mental trauma from the war; judges discounted such evidence on appeal; and governors passed on their opportunity to bestow the country's mercy. In older cases, some of that dismissiveness might be attributed to ignorance about PTSD and related problems. But many of those death sentences still stand today when the country knows better.
To read more CLICK HERE

Americans more afraid of gun violence than terrorism

When it comes to danger, voters are far more afraid of gun violence than terrorism.
But like almost everything else this election season, there’s a partisan split, a new McClatchy-Marist poll finds.

Overall, 63 percent of registered votes say they’re more worried that they or someone they know will be a victim of gun violence, while 29 percent more fear that they or a friend will fall prey to a terrorist attack.
Democrats and independents lean heavily toward gun violence as the bigger threat, a sentiment reflected in the party’s push for stricter gun laws in the wake of mass shootings this year in Charleston, S.C., Rosenburg, Ore., and Lafayette, La.
Democrats fear guns over terrorism by 77-15 percent. Independents fear gun violence over terrorism by 64-28 percent.
Republicans edge toward terrorism as the bigger threat, but only narrowly, by 50-45 percent over a fear of gun violence.
To read more CLICK HERE

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article43846755.html#storylink=cpy

U.S. Supreme rules officer immune from suit in shooting death

The Supreme Court made it harder Monday to sue police for using deadly force against fleeing suspects, ruling that officers are immune from lawsuits unless it is “beyond debate” that a shooting was unjustified and clearly unreasonable, reported the Los Angeles Times.
By an 8-1 vote, the justices tossed out an excessive force suit against a Texas police officer who ignored his supervisor’s warning and took a high-powered rifle to a highway overpass to shoot at an approaching car. The officer said he hoped to stop the car but instead shot and killed the driver.
The ruling bolsters previous decisions that give police the benefit of the doubt when they encounter a potentially dangerous situation. The court noted in an unsigned 12-page opinion that it has “never found the use of deadly force in connection with a dangerous car chase to violate the 4th Amendment.”
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor faulted the majority for “sanctioning a ‘shoot first, think later’ approach to policing.”
The court's decision comes at a time of growing concern over police shootings, including the killing last week of a 6-year-old Louisiana boy who was in the back seat of his father's car.
The two officers in that case have been arrested on suspicion of murder.
In cases where officers are not prosecuted, families sometimes sue in federal court and allege a violation of the 4th Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. Monday’s decision could affect many such cases, including a pending appeal from Los Angeles involving the police shooting of a suspected gang member.
To read more CLICK HERE

Kane declares senate committe hearing not legal

Attorney General Kathleen Kane has taken the position the Senate Committee considering her removal is not legal, and has refused to answer questions it submitted to her in an Oct. 29 letter from its chairman, Sen. John Gordner, R-Columbia, reported The Morning Call.
Her refusal caused the Senate to issue a subpoena to compel answers, but staff loyal to Kane last week refused to accept the legal document. The Senate had to go to Kane's legal defense lawyer for help with the subpoena process.
Gordner's letter sought copies of all documents outlining how the office is operating following Kane's suspension, as well as communication Kane has sent to the staff since her law license suspension.
The committee is to submit by Nov. 25 a report to the full Senate on whether Kane is fit to remain in office. The report will include preliminary findings, as well as an outline of procedures the committee would follow if it elects to move to a second phase.
That phase would determine if "there is sufficient evidence that warrants notice and a hearing" to remove Kane, using Article 6, Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The section is known as "Senate address," or "direct address." The Senate has not used the mechanism since the 1800s.
Aside from Gordner, the committee is comprised of Scarnati and Sens. Lisa Baker, R-Luzerne, Gene Yaw, R-Lycoming; Art Haywood, D-Montgomery; Judy Schwank, D-Berks; and Sean Wiley, D-Erie.
Under state law, the attorney general's office has multiple county jurisdiction to handle criminal and civil cases. The attorney general's office also can step in and handle a case at the request of a county prosecutor who believes he or she has a conflict of interest, does not have the resources to prosecute or other reasons.
To read more CLICK HERE

Without an execution in nine years--California seeks to change execution protocol

California seeks to allow corrections officials to choose one of four types of barbiturates to execute prisoners on death row depending on what's available, as states deal with a nationwide shortage of execution drugs, reported NBC New York.

The single drug would replace the series of three drugs that were last used when Clarence Ray Allen was executed in 2006, strapped to a gurney in what once was the gas chamber at San Quentin State Prison.

Eight states already have used a single anesthetic drug for executions, and five others have announced plans to switch to the method, according to the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center.

Publication of the proposed California regulations triggers a 62-day public comment period capped by a public hearing on Jan. 22. Even inmates, including the 747 awaiting execution on death row, can comment. There were more than 29,400 written comments the last time the department tried to adopt such regulations.

To read more CLICK HERE