|
MEDIA ADVISORY FROM FLORIDIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEATH PENALTY (FADP.org)19 November 2002 Contact: Abe Bonowitz - 800-973-6548
WIGGINS CASE SHOULD STAY FLORIDA EXECUTIONSU.S. Supreme Court To Review Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claim: Decision Could Impact Two Florida Cases Set For ExecutionThe U.S. Supreme Court announced yesterday that it will review the claim of a Maryland death row prisoner who has argued that his legal representation at the sentencing phase of his trial was so inadequate and ineffective it violated his rights under the U.S. Constitution. The court could use the case involving Kevin Wiggins to revisit its 1984 ruling in Strickland v. Washington, which set a low standard for determining what constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel. A decision affirming Wiggins' argument could impact the cases of both Amos King and Linroy Bottoson, two Florida death row inmates scheduled to be killed early in December. "We know that the death penalty is not reserved for the prisoners who commit the worst crimes, but rather for those with the worst lawyers," said Abe Bonowitz, Director of Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. "The U.S. Constitution guarantees a lawyer to a person on trial for a felony offense. It should also guarantee an effective lawyer. The standard established by the Court in Strickland is not adequate. The U.S. Supreme Court will now have an opportunity to revisit this standard. Notwithstanding issues like King's claim of innocence and Bottoson's mental illness, Governor Bush should not allow these executions to go forward until the Supreme Court rules in Wiggins and Florida courts determine the impact of that ruling on Florida cases." BACKGROUND ON WIGGINSIn Strickland, the Court established a two-pronged approach to the issue of whether a lawyer's performance was legally effective or ineffective. The Court held that the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficient performance deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Wiggins' new attorneys maintain that his trial lawyer did not adequately investigate his client's background and did not present to the jury evidence of borderline mental retardation and severe childhood abuse, including the fact that Wiggins was beaten, raped and burned as a child. The chief judge of the conservative 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, J. Harvie Wilkinson III, said he had doubts about Wiggins' guilt, but that Maryland's governor should decide whether to commute his sentence. "My own view is that (Wiggins) very probably committed the heinous offense for which he stands convicted," the judge wrote. "But I cannot say with certainty that he did so." In the two Florida cases, the court record clearly indicates problems with original trial lawyers. BACKGROUND ON AMOS KINGAmos King, scheduled to be killed on December 2, has been challenging the effectiveness of his trial counsel for over two decades. In 1983, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated his death sentence, claiming he received ineffective assistance during the penalty phase of his trial. The court found that his lead attorney, Thomas Cole, entered the trial fatigued and unprepared. Cole, although an experienced criminal defense lawyer, had been concentrating primarily on another case at the time, and met with his client only twice before the trial. His support attorney, Anthony Rondolino, joined the defense less than a week before the trial began. In vacating the initial death sentence, Judge Paul H. Roney of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote: "King was convicted on circumstantial evidence which however strong leaves room for doubt that a skilled attorney might raise to a sufficient level that, though not enough to defeat conviction, might convince a jury that the ultimate penalty should not be exacted." During the trial, Cole stated on the record: "Judge, I am beat, I have got to go home and get some sleep." On another occasion he said: "I can't think anymore." Of course, Cole represented King during the guilt phase of the trial as well, and little evidence indicates that he provided effective counsel at any point in the trial. Cole made several obvious errors while defending King, which several appellate judges noted in their opinions. He offered minimal challenges to critical pieces of evidence, including a kitchen knife a witness identified despite not having seen it in over a decade. He also failed to present a piece of potentially exculpatory evidence concerning hair samples found on the victim's nightgown and sheets. Several judges have argued in favor of reversing King's death sentence again, citing "lingering doubt" about his guilt and the effectiveness of his defense attorneys. BACKGROUND ON LINROY BOTTOSON*Bottoson was represented in his original 1981 trial by a young, inexperienced lawyer who knew little about presenting a capital defense. At the time, the state mandated fee caps that discouraged seasoned lawyers from defending inmates. Under the flat $2,500 cap, Bottoson's trial lawyer was paid the equivalent of $13 an hour. Bottoson got what the government paid for. Despite convincing evidence of Bottoson's long history of mental illness that could have persuaded a jury and judge against a death sentence, the young lawyer failed to raise the issue at trial. The lawyer explained to the judge that he could not afford to call witnesses, noting that "it all boils down to the fact that the county, the state (and) the Legislature (have) placed restrictions on my ability to conduct a meaningful defense on behalf of Mr. Bottoson." Bottoson's direct appeal was denied three years after his sentence. Facing his next level of appeals, Bottoson was at a disadvantage. The state had not yet created the current system of state-funded post-conviction lawyers for death-row inmates, and Bottoson did not have a lawyer. At the urging of the American Bar Association, Orlando lawyer James Russ, a sole practitioner, agreed to take Bottoson's case for free. He filed the next appeal in accordance with the deadlines. Then, according to Russ, nothing happened. The trial judge remained silent for nearly 10 years until he finally agreed to hear Bottoson's claims that his trial lawyer was inadequate, that a nationally respected dog handler called as a key witness by the state was later revealed to be a fraud and that Bottoson's long history of paranoid schizophrenia should disqualify him from execution. In 1996, a divided Florida Supreme Court rejected the appeal. A strong dissent written by Justice Gerald Kogan and signed by two others took the state of Florida to task for its notorious record of denying death-row inmates adequate counsel. Kogan said Bottoson's inexperienced trial lawyer and his pathetic fee resulted in a "clear and unmistakable deficiency in performance." ***** Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty calls on Governor Jeb! Bush to implement an immediate "Time-Out" on executions in Florida until such time as Florida's death penalty system can be independently certified as both fair and accurate. Stop the executions NOW! *Information on Bottoson includes material from a St. Petersburg Times editorial located at http://www.sptimes.com/News/021000/Opinion/Rush_to_death.shtml (We couldn't say it any better....) *****END***** SENT BY:
Abraham J. Bonowitz
Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (FADP)
 supporting and coordinating the work of organizations and
individuals educating and energizing the general public and state legislators supporting the many persons affected by capital crime and
punishment advocating specific legislative improvements
|
