Latest Headlines
- Community Health Northwest Florida Targeted In Cyberattack
- Walnut Hill Convicted Felon Facing Weapons Charge In Atmore
- One Injured In Highway 29 Crash Near Roberts Road
- Softball Team Remembers Teammate Killed In Pace Wreck
- Wanted Flomaton Man Arrested On Drug Charges After Allegedly Breaking Into Home While Fleeing Police
- It’s Easy To Recycle Your Wrapping Paper And Boxes
- Escambia Deputies Seek Christmas Day Attempted Homicide Suspect
- Escambia County Again Seeking Applicants For Escambia Children’s Trust
- Ice Flyers Get Rewarding Win Against Macon Mayhem
- ECFR Says McDavid Mobile Home Fire Was Sparked By Trash Fire; Firefighters Respond To Ascend
Today: Supreme Court To Hear Death Penalty Case From 1998 Nine Mile Popeye’s Murder
October 13, 2015
FOR AN UPDATE TO THIS STORY, CLICK HERE.
Today, U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled hear arguments in a challenge to the way Florida sentences people to death — a challenge backed by three former Florida Supreme Court justices and the American Bar Association.
The case, which stems from the 1998 murder of a Nine Mile Road Escambia County fast-food worker, focuses on the role that juries play in recommending death sentences, which ultimately are imposed by judges.
Hurst, now 36, was convicted in the 1998 murder of Cynthia Lee Harrison, who was an assistant manager at a Popeye’s Fried Chicken restaurant where Hurst worked. Harrison’s body was discovered bound in a freezer, and money was missing from a safe, according to a brief in the case.
Attorneys representing Death Row inmate Timothy Lee Hurst, including former U.S. Solicitor General Seth Waxman, contend that Florida’s unique sentencing system is unconstitutional. Supporting that position in friend-of-the-court briefs are former Florida Supreme Court justices Harry Lee Anstead, Rosemary Barkett and Gerald Kogan, along with the American Bar Association and seven former Florida circuit judges.
Part of the argument centers on what are known as “aggravating” circumstances that must be found before defendants can be sentenced to death. Hurst’s attorneys argue, in part, that a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requires that determination of such aggravating circumstances be “entrusted” to juries, not to judges.
Also, they take issue with Florida not requiring unanimous jury recommendations in death-penalty cases. A judge sentenced Hurst to death after receiving a 7-5 jury recommendation.
“Florida juries play only an advisory role,” Hurst’s attorneys wrote in a May brief. “The jury recommends a sentence of life or death based on its assessment of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, but that recommendation has no binding effect. Moreover, the jury renders its advisory verdict under procedures that degrade the integrity of the jury’s function. Unanimity, and the deliberation often needed to achieve it, is not necessary; only a bare majority vote is required to recommend a death sentence.”
But in an earlier brief, attorneys for the state argued that the U.S. Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court have repeatedly denied challenges to the sentencing process, including the Florida Supreme Court rejecting Hurst’s challenge. The state attorneys argued that a jury, in recommending the death penalty, has found facts that support at least one aggravating factor — which can be the basis for sentencing a defendant to death.
“Therefore, because the jury returned a recommendation of death, this court may infer the jury did find at least one aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt,” state attorneys wrote in a January brief in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In sentencing Hurst to death, a judge found two aggravating circumstances — that the murder was committed during a robbery and that it was “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel,” according to the brief filed by Hurst’s attorneys. That brief, along with others in the case, were posted on an American Bar Association website and on SCOTUSblog, which closely tracks U.S. Supreme Court proceedings.
Much of the hearing could focus on how to apply the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision — a major case known as Ring v. Arizona — to the Florida law. Hurst’s attorneys contend that the 2002 decision held that “findings of fact necessary to authorize a death sentence may not be entrusted to the judge.” They said Florida’s system undermines the juries’ constitutional “functions as responsible fact-finder and voice of the community’s moral judgment.”
The brief filed on behalf of Anstead, Barkett and Kogan raised similar arguments and said there is “no assurance that Florida death sentences are premised on a particular aggravating circumstance found by the jury.”
“And because jury unanimity is not mandated during the sentencing process, there is no assurance that a Florida jury’s death recommendation represents a reliable consensus of the community,” the brief said. “As a consequence, (the former justices) believe that the jury’s role is impermissibly denigrated and that there is an unacceptable risk that Florida death sentences are erroneously imposed, in violation of the Sixth and the Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.”
by Jim Saunders, The News Service of Florida
Comments
15 Responses to “Today: Supreme Court To Hear Death Penalty Case From 1998 Nine Mile Popeye’s Murder”
REGARDING:
“There are always Supreme Court Justices on the ballots.”"
Not US Supreme Court Justices.
Per The United States Constitution
Article III
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
They stay as long as they wish if they avoid breaking laws. Their only power is to issue rulings, opinions, so they need to be convincing. They don’t make laws, but explain what the laws say. The Constitution is the supreme law of the nation and all lower laws MUST comply.
David for justice
So, Seth Waxman, Harry Lee Amstead, Rosemary Bankett, Gerald Logan, the American bar, 7 former circuit judges have already challenged this and been denied and taking it to the Supreme Court AGAIN???? This infuriates me. I hope the Supreme Court tells them ÑO again. The death penalty has been abolished in many states…done away with! To me that is beyond stupidity. Make an express lane.
And what difference does it make if a couple of jurists didn’t find him guilty? You are ALWAYS gonna have a couple of women, homosexuals, or religious types that will, under no circumstances, find ANYONE guilty. Minorities, particularly minorities of the same minority of the defendant, will almost always find for the defendant. Sorry, I know this will anger some, but it is the truth. And if the law requires a unanimous decision for the death penalty on all capital murder cases, we are gonna be housing alotta prison lifers.
But that’s okay, politicians know the taxpayer will pony up the cash. The court system is a for profit organization, & from the highest judge down to the lowest paralegal, they all live quite nicely off of it. But somebody has to do it, & they must be paid decently.
@Just Saying….You will never elect a Federal Judge….They are appointed. Hence the battle between the GOP and the Democrats in their attempt to place a new judge onto the Supreme Court, that has been proffered by supporters of the sitting U.S.President. And, they are appointed for life by the president and his sycophantic congress. No vote from any citizen.
I knew Ms. Harrison. She worked at the Popeye’s and worked at the nearby WinnDixie. She too, had some physical limitations. These did not deter her from seeking her American dream. She, in no way, deserved what happened to her.
God Bless America. We really do need some help.
Plus, the longer they can keep this going, the more money they make. Where does this money come from? Why, from the sweat off the brow the the taxpayer, that’s where. Just who is the real sucker here?
I bet if it was one of their daughters this woulda been over long ago.
Some states have abolished the death penalty altogether. This is a move in that direction and infuriates me.That is WRONG for society as a whole. It begats more violence in ALL sectors of society. It make me long for the days of vigilante justice in our not so distant past.
Have a heart people maybe he really didn’t mean to do it, maybe his hand slipped and besides that he had a hard life. Let him go he will not do it again and he will become a productive member of society.
I have given up on the justice system a long time ago!!!
Lets all remember our wonderful elected officials and the elected judges who appoint these judges come time for elections. There are always Supreme Court Justices on the ballots. They are as much of the scum bags for wasting our tax money and giving this guy the hope to live as the guy himself.
WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY ? WHAT GOOD ARE LAWS IF ITS NOT GOING TO HELP THE TRASH THAT KEEPS BREAKING THEM. I KNEW THE LADY THAT WAS KILLED SHE WORK TOO JOBS JUST TRYING TO GET BY. AND NOW THIS TRASH MIGHT WALK FREE BECAUSE OF PAPER WORK. AND YOU WONDER WHY PEOPLE WANT GUNS IN THER HOME AND CARS TO PROTECT THEMSELFS. HOW ELSE CAN A WORMAN OR A MAN PROTECT THEMSELFS. LAWYERS THE DOWN FALL OF THIS COUNTRY. ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY RIGHT. JUST GET PAID DONT WORRY ABOUT WHAT RIGHT ANYMORE MAY GOD HELP US ALL
If they pass this, then i’ve given up on the legal system. He committed things to her
that are just too horible to state and could not even bury her with digenty. Anyone in the court procedings could see with their own eyes as to the monster he really is. They continue to throw him up in her loved ones life with no thought as to the pain they have suffered over the years and continue to do so. They cannot even go forward in anyway with this to continue to happen. Pain???? The lawyers don’t know pain until they’ve been through this.
If they want to pass a law or bill on something like this, then i suggest they get a better poster person.
He was guilty and that is all that matters…………………….
It’s time for him to pay for his crime, no matter what. We as tax payers are tired of paying to keep him alive when she is gone.
Where is the justice in that?????????????
A majority vote can put a man in the White House but not in the electric chair?
They’re not even trying to say he didn’t do it, the lawyers are wasting taxpayer money and causing the victim’s family to continue suffering just so they can argue over procedure.
Reminds me of the old joke…”What do you call half of all lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start!”
Lily livered liberals will let him loose, most likely. Or send him to some cushy mental institution. When an inmate plays the crazy card like Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, and the courts buy into it, pusillanimous is a word that comes to mind.
He should get what he gave to that poor woman, but it is not gonna happen.
Lawyers sucking tax money gumming up the works and obstructing justice. Exterminate murderers. That’s probably a community consensus.
I was living in Escambia County when this happened.
WHY is this scum still living? Oh~ due process. OK.
Time to FRY.