House Panel Approves Death Penalty Fix

February 3, 2016

A House panel on Tuesday approved proposed changes to the state’s death-penalty law in an effort to address a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down Florida’s capital-sentencing structure as unconstitutional.

The House Criminal Justice Subcommittee’s 11-2 vote on the measure (PCB CRJS 16-07) came less than two hours after the Florida Supreme Court issued an indefinite stay of execution for Cary Michael Lambrix, who had been scheduled to die on Feb. 11. The court heard oral arguments in the case Tuesday morning.

Lawmakers in both chambers are hurriedly preparing legislation in response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, issued on the opening day of the 2016 session, in a case known as Hurst v. Florida. The Jan. 12 ruling overturned the state’s capital felony sentencing system, which gives judges — and not juries — the power to impose the death penalty.

The high court’s decision came in the appeal of convicted murderer Timothy Lee Hurst, who was sentenced to death for the 1998 killing of fast-food worker Cynthia Harrison in Pensacola. Harrison, an assistant manager at a Popeye’s Fried Chicken restaurant on Nine Mile Road where Hurst worked, was bound, gagged and stabbed more than 60 times. Her body was found in a freezer.

The 8-1 decision focused on what are known as “aggravating” circumstances that must be determined before defendants can be sentenced to death. A 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, in a case known as Ring v. Arizona, requires that determination of such aggravating circumstances be made by juries, not judges.

Under Florida law, juries make recommendations regarding the death penalty, based on a review of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, but judges ultimately decide whether defendants should be put to death or sentenced to life in prison.

The House would allow death sentences to be imposed only if juries — after weighing aggravating and mitigating factors — unanimously decide that at least one aggravating factor exists. The proposal would also require at least nine jurors to vote for the death penalty. The legislation is based on the recommendations of state attorneys.

Of the 31 states with the death penalty, Florida is one of only three that do not require unanimous jury decisions about imposing death sentences. Florida law only requires a simple majority of the jury to recommend death. The only other two states that do not require unanimous decisions — Alabama and Delaware — require at least nine jurors to vote in favor of capital punishment.

Whether death-penalty jury verdicts should be unanimous has been a major source of debate during discussions about the Hurst ruling, which did not specifically address the issue. Nearly all experts — with the exception of prosecutors — recommend that the state adopt a unanimous jury requirement to avoid the risk that Florida’s sentencing system could be struck down again in the future.

“The question arises, do you look simply at the narrow issue that Hurst addressed or do you look at the whole body of cases that the United States Supreme Court has talked about?” 10th Judicial Circuit Public Defender Rex Dimmig told the panel Tuesday.

But prosecutor Brad King argued that the measure goes “well beyond the dictates” of the Supreme Court’s order. And King, the state attorney for the 5th Judicial Circuit, said it is impossible to predict how the court will rule in years to come.

“To think we can sit here today and presume to understand what the U.S. Supreme Court can do … in the future is honestly a pipe dream,” he said.

Requiring unanimous decisions on death-penalty sentences would allow a single juror “to hold hostage the entire process,” King argued, pointing out that some of Florida’s most-notorious crimes failed to result in unanimous jury recommendations for the death penalty.

But University of Miami Law Professor Scott Sundby, who trains Florida judges in the death penalty, said research shows that 92 percent of juries that voted 9-3 in favor of the death penalty returned the same result if required to reach a unanimous decision.

“In other words, in 92 percent of the cases, when they deliberated to unanimity, they still came out as death,” Sundby said.

Not requiring a unanimous decision would put Florida in danger of having its law struck down again, he predicted.

“I promise you this would invite a lot of constitutional litigation, and the odds of it being reversed by the (U.S.) Supreme Court are quite high,” Sundby told the committee.

The House panel rejected an attempt by Rep. Randolph Bracy, D-Orlando, to amend the bill to require unanimity on death sentences.

“There is great racial and gender and geographical discrimination in how the death penalty is applied,” Bracy, who is black, said. For example, “no white person has ever been sentenced to death for killing a black person” in Florida, Bracy said. In contrast, murders involving white women are 6.5 times more likely to result in the death penalty.

“One way to reduce the bias is require unanimous juries,” said Bracy, one of two Democrats on the subcommittee who opposed the bill.

But Chairman Carlos Trujillo, a former prosecutor, said Bracy’s concerns rested more with the application of the death penalty than with the sentencing phase.

And, he said, the proposal is far from a done deal.

“By no way, I think, is this a 100 percent finished product,” Trujillo, R-Miami, said. “I’m sure all of these recommendations will come to play at some point.”

Senate President Andy Gardiner told reporters Tuesday that “there a lot of members in our chamber that would prefer a unanimous decision.”

But the Senate may cede to the House’s 9-3 position to finalize a bill before the session ends next month.

“What’s important is that we get an agreement done, and we pass something this session to address what’s been brought forward by the U.S. Supreme Court. And I think we’re on track to do that,” Gardiner, R-Orlando, said.

Comments

One Response to “House Panel Approves Death Penalty Fix”

  1. joy bryant on February 4th, 2016 5:42 am

    this idea that the way the criminal dies is cruel and unusual –

    WHAT ABOUT THE VICTIM – wasn’t theirs cruel and unusual?

Written by William Reynolds · Filed Under News