Supreme Court justice Goodwin Liu, seen over in 2011, continuously pressed defense lawyers come cite precedent for their positions.

You are watching: Does ca have the death penalty


For decades, California’s greatest court has actually left it as much as individual jurors to decide whether certain circumstances rise the severity of a crime and also thereby warrant the death penalty in murder situations that qualify because that the can be fried punishment.

On Wednesday, the state supreme Court heard disagreements on a readjust to that long-standing practice, which might potentially overturn hundreds of fatality penalty sentences in California.

At issue is how juries review “aggravating” components — such together whether a crime to be gang-related or connected multiple victims. Defense lawyers in the case argued that come ensure equal application of the death penalty, state law and the state Constitution call for juries to it is in unanimous in their reasoning on each factor.

That the court is also considering new requirements is unusual. It has refused to impose lock in the past and has also summarily dismissed the kind of debates presented Wednesday.


But the court’s composition has changed over the years. Last June, the court authorize a quick order questioning for written debates on the jury issue in what was otherwise a routine death penalty case. That increased hopes amongst some that the court could be prepared to wield an ax to capital punishment in California, a state that has produced the country largest death row yet hardly any executions.

Wednesday’s hearing probably tempered those hopes. During a 90-minute hearing, only three justices — the an ext liberal members the the seven-judge court — spoke. Though the quiet of the majority can be construed in various ways, the hearing walk not clearly signal the monumental changes were afoot.

The June order asked litigants to send written disagreements on this issue: need to a jury decide beyond a reasonable doubt the a defendant should acquire the fatality penalty or life there is no parole, and also must the jury additionally be unanimous in deciding the reasons for a capital verdict? If the court agreed, a ruling would more than likely throw the end hundreds, if not all, previous fatality sentences in California.

The court’s sudden interest in the concern alarmed fatality penalty supporters. They considered the questions lengthy answered. Kent Scheidegger, a lawyer because that a significant pro-death punish group, claimed he was both “surprised” and also “very disturbed,” even with the changed composition of the court.


Over the critical decade, appointments through Govs. Jerry Brown and also Gavin Newsom, both enemies of the fatality penalty, have transformed the court from a middle conservative forum dominated by previous prosecutors come a moderately for free one. Democratic appointees now hold 5 of the seven seats.

Newsom, moreover, filed written disagreements in the case urging the court to take it a brand-new path. In a short written by two legal scholars, Newsom assailed the fatality penalty as racist and also cited study after study that uncovered the system discriminated against Black and also Latino defendants.


*

Politics

Gov. Gavin Newsom come block California death row executions, close san Quentin execution chamber


Justice Goodwin Liu, a Brown appointee, speak the most throughout the hearing. He consistently pressed defense lawyers to cite criterion for your positions.

“I think yes sir a most appeal come your debate from a fairness perspective,” Liu called a defense lawyer.

Liu’s “difficulty,” he said, remained in finding cases that supported the discussion legally. Is it possible, that asked, “that this worry has merely been let go this whole time? for 150 years, we have missed this issue?”

Under California’s fatality penalty law, resources trials are held in 2 phases. In the first, the jury decides guilt. The verdict need to be unanimous and beyond a reasonable doubt.

During the second phase, the jury decides even if it is to impose the death penalty or life without possibility of parole. The jury considers “aggravating” components that favor the fatality penalty and also weighs them against mitigating factors, such together a defendant’s background of gift severely abused.

Individual jurors can now decision which of several disputed, aggravating determinants weigh in donate of death. Your decision on the penalty need to be unanimous, yet their reasoning deserve to be varied. Defense lawyers desire the court to call for the jury to agree unanimously ~ above what variable justified the fatality penalty and also to decide the punish under a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.

Justice Joshua Groban, another Brown appointee, provided that court uphold criminal verdicts all the moment in which different jurors had different views around how the crime was committed.

But both Liu and Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, also a Brown appointee, seemed open to the idea that an can be fried jury decision on whether a defendant have to live or die must be made beyond a reasonable doubt.

Scheidegger said also that partial success for the defense would have actually a “cataclysmic” affect on the death penalty and potentially overturn scores the sentences. Together decisions in California space usually used retroactively.

But Scheidegger stated he felt “cautiously optimistic” after ~ the hearing.

Liu, the said, did no seem “to be buying” the defendant’s main arguments.

UC Berkeley regulation professor Elisabeth A. Semel, that co-wrote Newsom’s written argument, decreased to predict exactly how the court would vote.

“Justices Liu, Cuellar, and also Groban had some hard questions” because that the deputy attorney basic defending the death penalty, she said. “I perform not believe she answer to their satisfaction.”

California has more than 700 inmates on death row, however legal obstacles have stymied executions. Only 13 inmates have actually been executed because 1992, and Newsom imposed a moratorium top top executions throughout his hatchet in office.


*

UC Berkeley research finds 48% of voters supported Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2019 order for moratorium on executions in California, conversely, 33% to be opposed.


The case before the court is an appeal lugged by Don’te Lamont McDaniel, that was convicted v a co-defendant of start an apartment in southern Los Angeles’ Nickerson Gardens public real estate project in April 2004 to clear up a drug dispute.

McDaniel to be convicted the killing two people and wounding 2 witnesses. The dead were 33-year-old George Brooks and Brooks’ 52-year-old cousin Annette Anderson.

Whatever the court decides, the situation of civilization v. Don’te Lamont McDaniel has concentrated attention top top the same of the jury procedure in deciding the sentence.

Even Deputy Atty. Gen. Dana Muhammad Ali, who suggested that the law does not require the new jury rules, dubbed the debates of McDaniel’s lawyers “persuasive.” She said the state prosecutor’s office believes that including such rule “deserves major consideration” by voters, who could adjust the needs for how juries decide the fatality penalty.

“These added requirements are feasible due to the fact that there are other states that have actually incorporated them into their fatality penalty schemes,” she called the court.

Defense lawyer Elias Batchelder implored the court to it is in bold, in spite of the countless rulings that upheld fatality sentences without imposing the jury requirements.

See more: Dress Like A Cow Chick Fil A Ppreciation Day, Get Free Chick

“Sometimes court make extensive mistakes,” the said, “and the is no a malfunction of justice for courts come look deep at history and reconsider.”


CaliforniaCalifornia national politics
newsletter
The see from Sacramento


For reporting and exclusive evaluation from office chief man Myers, acquire our California politics newsletter.