"Before the court blocked Mr. Green's evidence, there were two days of testimony that showed the system is riddled with errors, inherently unreliable and in urgent need of reforms," the lawyers said in a statement. "Innocent people can and do get sentenced to death in Texas and across the country. Anyone who looks the other way is fooling himself.""
REPORTER CHUCK LINDELL: THE STATESMAN-AMERICAN;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: Texas State District Judge Kevin Fine caused an uproar when he was perceived as ruling that the way the death penalty is currently administered is unconstitutional. Critics are screaming judicial activism, seen as a judicial faux paus and usually a pejorative term; supporters say Fine is a "brave jurist" who has called out death penalty administration on its current merits, or apparent lack thereof. The defendant in this case, John Edward Green, Jr, is charged with capital murder in the 2008 slaying of one of two sisters he allegedly shot during a robbery. Witnessed by the victim's two children, Huong Nguyen, 34, was killed in her own driveway. The case has victims' right advocates calling for justice. In Texas generally, and in Harris County in particular, justice for a capital murder charge is exactly what the law allows for: the death penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A Houston defendant cannot challenge the state's death penalty laws as unconstitutional before his capital murder trial begins, the state's highest criminal court ruled Wednesday," the Statesman-American story by reporter Chuck Lindell published earlier today under the heading, "Court: Houston death penalty challenge must end," begins.
"The Court of Criminal Appeals ordered District Judge Kevin Fine to dismiss the challenge by John Edward Green Jr., who is charged with robbing and killing a Houston woman in 2008," the story continues.
"Green argued that the Texas death penalty law is unconstitutional because "its application has created a substantial risk that innocent people have been, and will be, convicted and executed."
Fine convened a Dec. 6 pretrial hearing on Green's motion and heard from defense witnesses who testified about 138 exonerations of U.S. death row inmates since 1978, including 12 in Texas.
But at the urging of prosecutors, who refused to participate in the hearing, the Court of Criminal Appeals halted proceedings the following day and requested briefs to determine if the hearing should continue.
On Wednesday, the court ruled 6-2 that Fine did not have the authority to hold a pretrial hearing on the constitutionality of a law. And until the death penalty statute is applied against Green, he does not have legal standing to challenge the law, the court ruled.
"One does not put the cart before the horse: a defendant has no claim of wrongful conviction or wrongful sentencing before he has even gone to trial," said the opinion by Judge Cathy Cochran.
"It bears noting that no provision of the current (death penalty statute) has been held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court or this court, although that statute has been attacked many times," Cochran added.
Judges Tom Price and Paul Womack dissented without submitting an opinion stating their reasons.
Green's lawyers — Dick Burr, Casey Kiernan and Robert Loper of Houston — said they were disappointed the court ignored the main issue: the continuing threat of wrongful conviction in death penalty cases.
"Before the court blocked Mr. Green's evidence, there were two days of testimony that showed the system is riddled with errors, inherently unreliable and in urgent need of reforms," the lawyers said in a statement. "Innocent people can and do get sentenced to death in Texas and across the country. Anyone who looks the other way is fooling himself."
Fine made national news in March when, in response to a motion from Green's lawyers, he declared the Texas death penalty law unconstitutional and said he believes innocent people have been executed.
He later rescinded that ruling and ordered the December hearing, saying he should have heard evidence before reaching such a conclusion."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The story can be found at:
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/court-houston-death-penalty-challenge-must-end-1181679.html
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=120008354894645705&postID=8369513443994476774
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
QUOTE:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: Texas State District Judge Kevin Fine caused an uproar when he was perceived as ruling that the way the death penalty is currently administered is unconstitutional. Critics are screaming judicial activism, seen as a judicial faux paus and usually a pejorative term; supporters say Fine is a "brave jurist" who has called out death penalty administration on its current merits, or apparent lack thereof. The defendant in this case, John Edward Green, Jr, is charged with capital murder in the 2008 slaying of one of two sisters he allegedly shot during a robbery. Witnessed by the victim's two children, Huong Nguyen, 34, was killed in her own driveway. The case has victims' right advocates calling for justice. In Texas generally, and in Harris County in particular, justice for a capital murder charge is exactly what the law allows for: the death penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The story can be found at:
ADDRESS:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=120008354894645705&postID=8369513443994476774
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
