1 / 21

DP - Appeals

DP - Appeals. Before WW2, federal appeals were rare. (indigent defendants, no legal help) The two Scottsboro rulings in the 1930s were major exceptions (CPUSA attys) (must have attorney, no all white juries). DP - Appeals. example Feb 15, 1933, an Italian immigrant named

chenoa
Télécharger la présentation

DP - Appeals

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DP - Appeals Before WW2, federal appeals were rare. (indigent defendants, no legal help) The two Scottsboro rulings in the 1930s were major exceptions (CPUSA attys) (must have attorney, no all white juries)

  2. DP - Appeals example Feb 15, 1933, an Italian immigrant named Giuseppe Zangara tried to assassinate Pres Franklin D. Roosevelt in Miami, Florida - he ended up shooting and wounding five people. Two weeks later (March 3) one of those shot (Anton Cermak, Mayor of Chicago) died. 17 days later (Mar 20) Zangara was executed -- after two trials!!

  3. DP - Appeals another example The Sacco-Vanzetti case in Massachusetts in the 1920s was appealed for years. (two radical immigrants falsely accused of a robbery - for political reasons ) They were eventually executed, too. Appeals were almost never successful.

  4. DP - Appeals After World War 2 1950s Numerous test cases relating to discrim - one case at a time - appeals didn’t work. Issues relating to sham trials were usually the basis of the appeals.

  5. DP - Appeals 1960s The Warren Court and “due process” revolution Fed courts slowly intervening in criminal cases Then they were flooded with cases by LDF UGLY RACIST CASES The DP quickly declined & execs ended

  6. DP - Appeals 1970s 1972 - Furman v. Georgia 1976 - Gregg v. Georgia Court promised to ensure fairness - by using appeals to oversee state DP systems. ** Habeas Corpus -- the “Great Writ” ** Colateral Review -- state & federal

  7. DP - Appeals 1980s - morass of appeals stopped most executions under the new laws States didn’t fix systems (racism and cost!) More conservative Court refused to intervene Result was “endless appeals” stalemate

  8. DP - Appeals 1980s Why “endless appeals”?? • Incompetent attorneys & sham trials • Appeals and new evidence (better attorneys!) • “Passing the buck” - collateral review shuffle • (plus discrim, mistakes, and other issues)

  9. DP - Appeals 1980s In order to speed up appeals, Congress funded a number of regional resource centers in the 1980s (eventually totalled 19 centers). Lawyers at the centers won hundreds of cases (mainly because of sham trial problems). Repub-dominated Congress de-funded the centers in 1996.

  10. DP - Appeals 1988 - the Powell Committee (biased comm apt by Renquist) • “one bite at the apple” • time limits for appeals judges • appointed attys for appeals process • opt-in by states • IGNORED INADEQUATE TRIAL REP

  11. DP - Appeals 1988 - ABA Committee (honest comm with broad representation) • one round of appeals • longer time limits • competent attys at both trial & appeals

  12. DP - Appeals Reports published in 1989 - and deadlock • Democrats mostly supported ABA recs • Republicans supported Powell recs (appeals morass and gridlock continued)

  13. DP - Appeals 1992 Bill Clinton elected 1994 Repub congress elected 1996 Compromise “Anti-Terrorism and Effective DP Act” (dp part based entirely on Powell Comm recs!!)

  14. DP - Appeals Reagan/Bush appointees on the Court (by now very conservative and pro-DP) “fast-tracked” and approved the Act (Felker v. Turpin 1996) States began to “opt-in” (mostly South)

  15. DP - Appeals BUT - Remember the brilliant lawyers from the Moratorium Campaign - they were ready ** They challenged the opt-in process in the courts and tied that up in appeals!! (basis was separation of powers) Meanwhile the sham trials continued, death rows grew larger and larger, etc.

  16. DP - Appeals Then the bad publicity started to come in from DNA testing - showed that there are many innocent people on death rows. A highly respected study from Columbia Univ Law School refered to the whole DP system as a “broken system.” And discrimination remained rampant.

  17. DP - Appeals 1997 - The ABA called for a moratorium on executions until problems fixed. ABA Report documented the whole range of continuing problems.

  18. DP - Appeals After 2000 – a “Strange Irony” Conservative pro-dp Republicans gained control of: Presidency, Congress, most Federal courts, most state governors, and most state legislatures and courts AND THE DP WENT INTO A RAPID DECLINE!!! (dropping sentences, fewer exec, etc.) WHY??

  19. DP - Appeals Dual impact of DNA? Proved that mistakes are common – but offered no solution to the problem – only about one third of dp cases involve physical evidence. Maybe more important, dna exonerations focused attention on the “broken system” with its shoddy trials and rampant class/race/ethnic discrim.

  20. DP - Appeals A broken system can’t stand scrutiny – with few executions and only “inconclusive” (and complicated!!) debates over problems (like discrim, deterrence, etc.) there is little public interest in the dp beyond the abstract issue of “for or against” With more execs and then the arrival of DNA there is more attention and the flaws emerge

  21. DP - Appeals • The case of Illinois • Outside the south in general • The south (racism still driving force) (but even here the dp seriously weakened) “The classic death penalty case in Georgia remains a black person prosecuted by a white district attorney before a white judge and an all-white jury for a crime against a prominent white person.” Gary Parker, Georgia State Senator

More Related