Abolition Now !

Stages in a capital case

The stages in a capital case can be (usually) divided into 7 phases:

1. Pre -Trial Phase
2. Guilt Phase Trial
3. Penalty Phase Appeal
4. Direct Appeal
5. Post-Conviction Review
6. Federal Habeas Corpus
7. (Execution)

● Note that not every case goes through all of the steps outlined above.  

Some states have different procedures, but they are gross similar procedures in all U.S. states (which have the death penalty).

1.)  Pre-Trial Phase

Crimes that would be eligible for the death penalty almost always involve murders which shock the community. 

There is often considerable pressure on the police to make an arrest, and an the prosecutor to get a conviction. 

The police usually must depend on evidence gathered at the scene of the crime and on possible eyewitnesses, because they rarely come up upon such a crime in progress.  They often have to rely on photographs who have commited crimes in the past to display to “eyewitnesses” who might be able to identify a suspect.  

Thus, even though a particular individual has no connection to a crime, he might become a suspect if he looks like the actual perpetrator.  The police also uses informants who hope to gain something by providing information about a particular case.  They may or may not be reliable, but may form the basis building a case around a particular suspect. 

A capital murder defendant has a trial before a state judge in the country where the killing occurred.  He is constitutionally entitled to an effective defense.  If he can’t afford a lawyer, the trial judge appoints a local lawyer to represent him. 

If the jury convicts him, the panel then decides whether he should be sentenced to life in prison or death.

2.) Guilt Phase Trial  / Jury Selection (voir dire)

A preliminary examination of prospective jurors by a judge or lawyer to decide if the prospects are qualified and suitable to serve on a jury.  

In capital cases, prospective jurors must be “death qualified”, i.e., questioned about their ability to consider both arravating and mitigating evidence and to render a death sentence in an appropriate case.

3.)  Penalty Phase Trial

The phase  in which the facts that make the crime worse or more serious (aggravating circumstances) and facts that may reduce the degree of moral culpability and thereby reduce the penalty are produced;

Victim Impact Statements come up and where the jury considers both side’s circumstances surrounding the crime and the defendant and returns with a recommended sentence. (In death penalty sentence, the jury chooses between a death sentence and a lesser sentence). 

 After considering the jury recommendation, the court formally pronounces punishment on the defendant.

4.)        Direct Appeal

Once  a person is found guilty,  the presumption of innocence is removed.  

The defendant now has to burden of showing that a critical mistake was made in the process that convicted him.

Most of the review which occurs does not revisit factual issues decided at trial.

Some states have time limits as short as three weeks for the admission of any new evidence after the conclusion of the trial.

The constitution does not require that a defendant be provided with  a lawyer representing him throughout the appeals process.  Even when represented, the lawyer must be aware of numerous procedural rules for filing appeals.  If the rules are not precisely followed, issues may be lost forever from the appeals process.

The direct appeal is limited to issues that arose during the trial, (such as the judge’s decision to admit certain evidence or testimony over the defense’s objection).

There are several possible procedures:

4.1. Motion for a new trial:

A post-judgement request that the court vacate the judgement and order a new trial for any of various reasons, such as insufficient evidence, newly discovered evidence, or jury misconduct.  In some jurisdictions, this motion is required before a party can fila an appeal. 

In most cases, it is quickly denied.

4.2.  Appeal to the State’s Highest Criminal Court

A proceeding undertaken to reverse a decision by bringing it to a higher authority.  The defendant submits the trial court’s decision to a higher court for review and possible reversal.

4.3.  Petition to U.S. Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari

The Supreme Court can, at it’s discretion, decide to review the decisions of a lower court on federal issues.  However, the Supreme Court takes about 1% of the cases submitted for it’s review.

5.) Post – Conviction Review

Again, there are different procedures to describe:

5.1. Petition to State Trial Court

The defendant can raise issues in his or her case that are not reflected in the record on appeal, such as ineffective assistance of trial counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, or juror misconduct. 

This petition is usually submitted to the same judge who presided over the trial.

5.2. Appeal to State’s Highest Criminal Court

The decision of the state’s  trial court can be appealed to the State’s Highest Criminal Court.

5.3. Proportionality Review

The state appelate court can compare the sentence in the case being reviewed with sentences in similar cases within the state.  Where utilized, this practice can help the state to identify and eliminate sentencing disparities.  However, many states have abandoned a formal review of this type.

5.4. Petition to U.S. Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari

  (** View the definition in Direct Appeal.)

  6.)  Federal Habeas Corpus    (** view definition under direct appeal )

A criminal defendant who is convicted and sentenced to death in state court cannot directly appeal to a federal district court. Yet a prisoner on death row can challenge his conviction or sentence indirectly by petitioning for a federal writ of habeas corpus. A federal district court can entertain a habeas petition if it alleges that state corrections officials are holding the applicant in custody in violation of "the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States."

In theory, a federal habeas corpus petition is an independent civil suit, in which the prisoner asks only that the federal court determine the validity of his current detention. In substance, a habeas action constitutes a collateral challenge to the prisoner's treatment in state court. When the prisoner claims that his detention violates federal law, the warden invariably responds that the prisoner's criminal conviction and sentence justify the custody about which he complains. That, in turn, places the validity of the conviction or sentence before the federal court for review.

6.1. Petition to Federal District Court

  A pleading presented to the federal court seeking a writ to bring a person before a court to ensure that the party’s imprisonment is not illegal. (Such petitions are now closely regulated and limited through federal legislation in 1996).  (**also view: Habeas Corpus)

6.2. Evidentiary Hearing

  This is a hearing before a federal judge similar to the trial, in which evidence is presented to prove or disaprove a ststement in the federal habeas corpus petition.  The judge has the discretion to deny such a hearing.

  6.3. Appeal to Federal Court of Appeals

The losing party may appeal the District Court’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals.  The appeall is heard by a panel of three judges.

6.4. En Banc Review

A rarely granted review of the panel’s decision in the defendant’s case  in which the full Circuit Court participates.

6.5.Petition to U.S. Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari

A defendant can ask the Supreme Court to review the denial of his post-conviction review, just as the defendant ask the Supreme Court to review the denial of his direct appeal.

(** view definition in direct appeal)

During the direct appeal, a second lawyer is appointed to simultaneously begin an appeal called the habeas corpus proceedings.  The new attorney’s job is to search for constitutional violations, (such as suppressed evidence or that the inmate’s trial lawyer was ineffective and failed to raise evidence, question witness or mount a credible defense).

If the state habeas appeals fails, the prisoner may file a similar appeal with a U.S. District Court judge in the area where the killing occurred.  After the federal judge issues a decision, either the inmate or lawyers for the state may ask the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to reverse the ruling .

The decision by the 5th Circuit panel may then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.  (But the high court agrees to hear such appeals only in rare cases involving important constitutional issues. New law provides that the federal courts cannot review new issues not previously heard by state courts, and the federal judiclary must give deference to the decisions already rendered by state courts).

7.)  Clemency  

After all appeals fail and the execution is imminent, the inmate asks the members of the “clemency board” or “parole board”, or “board of parole and pardon”; differently named in the states,  to recommend a sentence commutation to life in prison, or a pardon in the instance of innocence. 

(In the state of Texas, the members are scattered across the state and do not meet as a group but review clemency petitions individually, then fax their votes  to Austin.  The governor my commute a death sentence only if majority of the board recommends that he do so).  But the board, appointed by the governor, almost always votes unanimously against clemency. When that happens, the governor may only grant a one-time, 30-day stay of execution).

8.)   Execution

The defender is put to death by lethal injection, gas chamber, electrocution, hanging or firing squad.

EXECUTION   IS   NOT   THE  SOLUTION   ! ! !