death penalty

Perdue signs Racial Justice Act

bkrueger — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:34:43 -0400

Gov. Beverly Perdue signed into law this morning the Racial Justice Act, saying it will make sure that the death penalty in North Carolina will be "based on the facts and the law, not racial prejudice."

The act allows Death Row inmates and people charged with capital crimes to argue before a judge that race was a significant factor in the imposition of the death sentence. If the judge agrees, the death sentence can be overturned to life in prison without parole.

Perdue, a Democrat, said in signing the bill that she is a supporter of the death penalty. But she said "it must be carried out fairly."

Racial Justice Act clears Senate

kkiley — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:57:58 -0400

Convicted felons will be allowed to challenge their death sentences on grounds of racial bias according to a law that passed the Senate on Wednesday night.

The N.C. Racial Justice Act, which passed by a vote of 25-18, would allow defendants to challenge death sentences using statistical evidence that shows that race was a factor in imposition of the death penalty at a local or state level. The bill still requires the governor's approval.

"The need for this bill is self evident to prevent any type of conduct that would be impermissible when it comes to the imposition of the death penalty," said Sen. Floyd McKissick, a Durham Democrat an the bill's sponsor.

When the bill originally passed the Senate, it did so with amendments that would end a de facto moratorium on executions created when physicians refused to participate. The House removed those provisions when it passed its version of the bill.

Opponents of the bill said it will end the imposition of the death penalty in North Carolina.

"Concurring in the House version of this bill is a vote to say we should not have a death penalty in North Carolina," said Sen. Phil Berger, the chamber's Republican leader.

Death penalty bill gets final House vote

bniolet — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:28:37 -0400

The House voted in favor of a bill that would allow death row inmates to challenge their sentence as racially motivated.

Opponents criticized the bill saying it would allow a flood of unnecessary and frivolous challenges from every inmate.

"We're fixing to put another road block in the path of those who believe in capital punishment," said Rep. Leo Daughtry, a Johnston County Republican.

Supporters say the bill is necessary to ensure that the penalty is carried out fairly. Rep. Grier Martin, a Raleigh Democrat, said support for the bill and support for capital punishment are not contradictory because both are about justice.

"It is not a paradox," Martin said. "In fact it is entirely consistent with that same sense of justice."

The bill now returns to the Senate.

Executions bill leads to emotional debate

bniolet — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:48:29 -0400

Judges would be allowed to consider whether racial bias played a role in the decision to seek or impose the death penalty, according to a bill on which the N.C. House voted Tuesday evening after a long and emotionally charged debate.

"This is a fairness bill," said Rep. Larry Womble, the Winston-Salem Democrat who helped champion the bill. "If we're going to kill people, we must be as fair and objective as we can. This allows one more chance for justice to be blind. ... It's not a get-out-of-jail free card for anybody."

Democrats cited studies showing blacks are far more likely to be sentenced to death in North Carolina than whites. Further, a defendant is 3.5 times more likely to face the death penalty when the victim is white than when the victim is black.

Republicans strongly oppose the measure, saying its passage will clog the courts with frivolous appeals, cost millions and impose a de facto moratorium on executions.

"This bill is not really about race," said Rep. Paul Stam of Wake County, the minority leader. "It's about the death penalty."

The N.C. Racial Justice Act passed its second reading in the House 61-55, with every Republican and four Democrats voting no.

A final House vote could come today, and the bill would then return to the Senate, where it may have a difficult time gaining approval and may require a compromise. That's because the House version left out a section of the Senate bill designed to help remove obstacles that have effectively halted executions for two years. Senate leaders said that provision must be included for the Racial Justice Act to pass that chamber. (N&O)

Racial Justice Act clears committee

bkrueger — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:27:06 -0400

The Racial Justice Act, which would allow challenges to death sentences based on race, narrowly cleared a House committee this morning.

The act would require defendants to prove that race played a “significant factor” in a prosecutor’s decision to seek the death penalty, or in a jury vote to impose the sentence, reports April Bethea of The Charlotte Observer. It allows the use of statistics to show, among other things, that the death sentence was sought or imposed more frequently for persons of one race versus others.

Defendents can challenge the use of the death penalty either in a pre-trial conference or after conviction. Current death row inmates would have up to one year after the bill goes into effect to challenge their sentences.

A successful challenge would keep a prosecutor from seeking the death penalty, or would vacant a death sentence in exchange for life in prison without parole.

More after the jump.

NAACP fights thaw in execution freeze

bniolet — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:00:00 -0400

The National NAACP wants the legislature to pass a bill that would let people facing the death penalty argue that race was a significant factor in prosecutors' decision to seek the death penalty or in juries' voting to impose it.

The bill, known as the Racial Justice Act, is being pushed by the state NAACP and other groups, Lynn Bonner reports.

The bill passed the Senate with a provision the death-penalty opponents don't want, one that aims to restart executions after a de facto moratorium of more than two years.

The National NAACP set up an easy way for supporters to send e-mail messages to House Speaker Joe Hackney and Senate leader Marc Basnight asking them to get the bill passed without the Senate addition.

Execution provision yanked from bill

janestancill — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:13:32 -0400

A state House committee today removed a provision of the Racial Justice Act that would restart the execution process in North Carolina.

The bill would allow defendants to challenge death penalty sentences on grounds of racial bias. Last month, the state Senate added a provision that would restart lethal injections, which have been on hold for various legal reasons.

The provision was taken out of the House committee's substitute version of the bill, reports Kevin Kiley.

Republican committee members said without the provision the bill likely would not make it out of committee or receive majority support in the full House.

The committee will return to the bill in two weeks.

Supreme Court: Doctors can be present

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:00:14 -0400

The N.C. Supreme Court has ruled that doctors can be present at executions.

In a 4-3 decision authored by Justice Edward Thomas Brady, the court found that the N.C. Medical Board could not prohibit physicians from participating in the state's capital punishment procedures.

A state statute, "by its plain language, envisions physician participation in executions in some professional capacity," Brady wrote.

The medical board, a professional group that sets ethics rules for doctors, had barred doctors from monitoring inmates who were being put to death. In a lawsuit, the state Department of Correction argued that state law requiring doctors trumped the board's decision.

A Wake County Superior Court judge sided with the state in 2007, but executions remained in limbo while the case was being resolved. In today's ruling, the majority of the state Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling.

In a dissent, Justices Robin Hudson and Patricia Timmons-Goodson and Chief Justice Sarah Parker argued the court should have let the legislature decide the issue.

Springsteen: Back N.C. bill

ryanteaguebeckwith — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:56:58 -0400

The Boss wants you to support a state bill.

At his concert Saturday night in Greensboro, rocker Bruce Springsteen is expected to encourage his fans to support the N.C. Racial Justice Act, which would allow courts to review death penalty cases for racial bias.

He will be hosting the nonprofit People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, which he has done at concerts in North Carolina since 2000. Over the years, he has encouraged more than 125,000 people from the stage to join the group.

"Bruce Springsteen knows that if people really look at the administration of the death penalty they will not like what they find, with racial bias and wrongful convictions so evident," said executive director Stephen Dear.

The group will hand out pamphlets and collect signatures and donations at the concert, Springsteen's only scheduled date in North Carolina.

Harrison: Titles help sell the bill

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:23:15 -0400

Rep. Pricey Harrison has titled a few bills in her day.

The Greensboro Democrat, a prolific bill filer, said a good bill title can "put a positive spin on an issue."

She's co-sponsored a few good ones:

Appalachian Mountains Preservation Act: Would prohibit North Carolina's electric utilities from buying coal that comes from so-called "mountaintop removal" methods.

Access to Higher Education: Would prohibit state community colleges and universities from asking students whether they were illegal immigrants.

North Carolina Racial Justice Act: Allows racial discrimination to be taken into consideration when determining whether to impose the death penalty.

Still, she made a distinction between her college bill and, say, the Defense of Marriage Act.

"That was more about taking it out of a discussion of illegal immigration and making it what the bill is really about, which is access to higher education," she said. "The Defense of Marriage Act is a ban on gay marriages — kind of the exact opposite of what the title says."

More after the jump.