Cutting appeals 'could be Catch-22'

Cutting appeals 'could be Catch-22'

Death row inmates

Pan to eliminate state appeals for death row inmates may not speed up the legal process.

Loughlin, Sean

The Gainesville Sun

HIST 298, University of Mary Washington

1987-03-07

The materials in this online collection are held by Special Collections, Simpson Library, University of Mary Washington and are available for educational use. For this purpose only, you may reproduce materials without prior permission on the condition that you provide attribution of the source.

2 JPG

English

Florida

Attorney General Bob Butterworth says the plan to eliminate some of Death Row inmates’ state appeals may not speed up the process.

TALLAHASSEE – While agreeing with Gov. Bob Martinez’s view that appeals for Death Row inmates take too long, Attorney General Bob Butterworth expressed some skepticism Monday that Martinez’s plan to eliminate some state appeals would solve the problem.

“We’re all in favor of speeding up the system,” Butterworth said. “But like I said, we’re reserving judgment (on the proposal). It could just back up one court, so it might not speed anything up. It could be a Catch-22 situation.”

Martinez, a vocal critic of lengthy death-penalty litigation, last week proposed eliminating one series of appeals for condemned inmates, who average spending more than 9 1/2 years on Death row.

Currently, inmates can appeal collateral issues through state circuit courts all the way to the Florida Supreme Court. Collateral appeals focus on such issues as the competency of an inmate to stand trial and whether the prosecution withheld any evidence from the defense.

Those issues can also be argued through the federal court system.

Saying there is too much duplication, Martinez wants to eliminate collateral appeals in state circuit courts, giving only the Florida Supreme Court a chance to hear such challenges before they enter the federal system.

But Butterworth, whose office represents the state on death-penalty cases, said the problem with long appeals doesn’t really lie with the state.

“The real issue is at the federal level,” Butterworth said. The state already has a two-year time limit in which a condemned inmate must raise all collateral (constitutional) challenges. There is no such time limit for the federal court system.

Butterworth said he hoped Martinez succeeds in generating enough support for his plan, but he wasn’t optimistic that legislators would agree to completely eliminate one phase of the appeals process.

In a separate move, U.S. Sen. Bob Graham has introduced a bill in Washington that would place a two-year time limit for collateral appeals in the federal courts, a move Butterworth says he supports.

Graham has tried unsuccessfully in previous years to get that bill passed. Deputy Attorney General James York said he is frustrated more by federal courts that overturn or delay death sentences than state courts that review the legal challenges.

While saying he appreciated the governor’s frustration with the current system, York said the proposal to eliminate some state appeals might result in the federal system “doing even more review” of death penalty cases.

Defense attorneys for condemned inmates have lambasted all proposals to shorten the appeal. Several attorneys have said the maze of state and federal court hearings helps to prevent mistakes from being made before the state puts someone to death.

Cutting out parts of that system may backfire for death penalty advocates, according to Michael Mello, a lawyer who once represented condemned inmates in Florida and is now a professor at the Vermont Law School.

“Nothing’s going to get rid of executions faster than a string of executing innocent people,” Mello Said.

But Peter Dunbar, general counsel for Martinez, said the issue is not having sufficient appeals, but having a duplication of appeals.

Dunbar said the governor agreed with Butterworth that the reform is needed at the federal level, but Martinez can only address the state system.

“How many times do you have to hear the same issues-until someone says, “We’ve heard it once, twice, three times, you’re out,” Dunbar said. “You don’t need to be duplicating your efforts.”

Newspaper

Rigmaiden, Erin

Williams, Megan