 |
| Students with clinical professors |
The Cornell Death Penalty Project offers Cornell law students a Capital Trial Clinic, a Capital Post-conviction Clinic, and a Capital Appellate Clinic. In the past, the project has also offered a Wrongful Convictions and Sentences Clinic. These opportunities are unique in that law students participate not only in traditional legal research and writing, but in factual development as well. The clinic has represented inmates at all stages of the criminal process, from trial to state post-conviction to federal habeas corpus to certiorari proceedings in the U.S. Supreme Court. With the exception of oral argument, students have participated in all aspects of that representation. Student response to involvement in developing the factual basis for claims has been overwhelmingly positive.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASES
Michael Bies
Michael Bies was convicted and sentenced to death in Ohio in 1992. During the direct appeal of that judgment, the Ohio appellate courts acknowledged that Bies was mentally retarded, but found that fact insufficient to warrant overturning his death sentence. In subsequent post-conviction litigation, the state conceded the fact of Bies’ mental retardation, but insisted his death sentence remained valid under then-prevailing law. After the Supreme Court barred the execution of mentally retarded offenders in Atkins v. Virginia, Bies returned to the Ohio state courts seeking relief from his death sentence based on the prior findings and concessions that he is mentally retarded. The state opposed this request, demanding an opportunity to litigate the question it had previously conceded, and the state court denied Bies’ request for relief. In a subsequent federal habeas corpus proceeding, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the state court’s decision to reopen the question of Bies’ mental retardation violated the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause.
The state challenged the Sixth Circuit’s decision in the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Project became involved to assist Bies’ Ohio attorney in the effort to preserve the favorable judgment that had been rendered by the court of appeals. In June 2009, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Sixth Circuit’s decision and cleared the way for an evidentiary hearing on Bies’ mental retardation in the Ohio state court. Bobby v. Bies, 129 S.Ct. 2145 (2009). The Project remains involved with the case as it proceeds toward that hearing.
Bobby Holmes
Mr. Holmes was convicted of the robbery, rape and murder of Mary Stewart. At trial, Holmes sought to introduce compelling evidence that another man, Jimmy White, had actually committed the crime.
 |
| Trevor Morrison, Sheri Johnson and John Blume at the U.S. Supreme |
He proffered testimony from a number of witnesses to establish that White fit the victim's description of the perpetrator; that White was near the victim's home at the time of the crime; that White had a history of violence against older women; and that White had confessed on several occasions to committing the crime himself. The evidence was excluded under South Carolina's rule on the admissibility of third-party guilt evidence. John Blume presented Mr. Holmes' case before the U.S. Supreme Court in February 2006, arguing that South Carolina's restrictions on third-party guilt evidence violate a criminal defendant's right to present a complete defense. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed Holmes' conviction. Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006).
Scott Panetti
Scott Panetti, a veteran of the U.S. Navy, has suffered from schizophrenia for decades. Panetti was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in Texas for killing his parents-in-law. While Panetti’s mental illness is undisputed, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals nevertheless held that Panetti was sufficiently competent to be executed merely because he was aware of the fact that he would be executed and the fact that he would be executed as punishment for his crime. In doing so, the court rejected evidence of Panetti’s delusional belief that he was to be executed for preaching the Gospel, a symptom of his mental illness, as irrelevant. In support of Mr. Panetti’s appeal to the United States Supreme Court, Professors Blume and Seeds authored an amicus brief on behalf of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, one of the nation’s largest mental health organizations. The Supreme Court reversed the death sentence, holding that a prisoner’s delusions must be considered in determining incompetence for execution. Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007).
Allen Snyder
Allen Snyder, a black man, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by an all-white jury in Louisiana. Prior to trial, the prosecutor made repeated public statements comparing Snyder’s case to the O.J. Simpson case. When trial counsel moved prevent further such statements, the prosecutor promised he would stop making O.J. Simpson comparisons. During jury selection, the prosecutor struck all of the qualified black jurors. Then in his closing argument at the penalty phase, the prosecutor urged the jury to sentence Snyder to death because O.J.. Simpson "got away with it." The Lousiana Supreme Court affirmed Snyder’s conviction, finding no evidence that the prosecutor discriminated on the basis of race during jury selection. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for reconsideration in light of Miller-EL v. Dretke, but the Louisiana Supreme Court again affirmed, reasoning that the O.J. Simpson comparisons were irrelevant to the assessment of racial motivation because in those comments, the prosecutor never referred to either Simpson’s race or Snyder’s race. The Project filed an amicus in support of the petition for certiorari, and the Supreme Court accepted the case for merits review. In March 2008, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Louisiana Supreme Court. Snyder v. Louisiana, 128 S.Ct. 1203 (2008).
William Weaver
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that Weaver was entitled to a new sentencing hearing as a result of numerous improper and prejudicial statements made by the prosecutor during his closing argument at the sentencing phase of Weaver’s Missouri capital trial. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether, under the AEDPA, there was “clearly established Federal law” supporting that decision. After the High Court granted the state’s cert petition, Professor Blume was asked to become lead counsel in Weaver’s case. Assisted by Cornell students and by Professors Morrison and Johnson, Blume prepared the brief and argued the cause for Weaver. The Supreme Court ultimately resolved the case in Mr. Weaver’s favor and reinstated the judgment of the Eighth Circuit. Roper v. Weaver, 127 S. Ct. 2022 (2007).
CURRENT CASES
Jonathan Binney
Mr. Binney was convicted of breaking into the home of Judy Southern and shooting her when she returned from work. He had recently been released from a mental health treatment facility after a suicide attempt. Mr. Binney confessed to police that he borrowed a gun from a friend and broke into Southern’s home having never met Judy Southern before. He left a suicide note to his wife, which was later found in Judy Southern’s yard. 
A psychologist testified at trial that Mr. Binney suffered from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and that he exhibited so many other characteristics of mental illness that she could not make a single diagnosis. Mr. Binney was sentenced to death. Clinic students are currently assisting Project staff in their representation of Mr. Binney in state post-conviction proceedings. (Photo at left: Clinic students and Professor Blume following oral argument before the South Carolina Supreme Court in Mr. Binney's case).
Edward Elmore
"Eddie" Elmore was sent to South Carolina's death row in 1982. In the fall of 2009, his death sentence was set aside on the ground that he is mentally retarded, and therefore ineligible for execution under the Supreme Court's decision in Atkins v. Virginia. There is also significant evidence that Mr. Elmore is factually innocent. His challenges to his conviction are currently on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The Cornell Death Penalty Project is joined in this case by Barry Scheck of Cardozo University's Innocence Project. Mr. Elmore's case has been featured on several television shows, including Court TV’s "The Wrong Man" series.
Donald Fell
Donald Fell was convicted and sentenced to death under the Federal Death Penalty Act in the District Court of Vermont for the inter-state kidnapping and murder of a woman whom he and a co-defendant carjacked, fleeing the scene of the murder of Fell’s mother and her friend. Fell’s appeal, argued by Professor Blume, was denied by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and his petition for writ of certiorari is pending in the Supreme Court of the United States. 
Emmanuel Hammond
The Project became involved in Hammond’s case after he was sentenced to death in a high-profile Atlanta case, and his conviction had been affirmed on direct appeal. Students from the Project have worked on the Hammond case for almost a decade. The Project’s investigation has uncovered an extraordinary amount of prosecutorial misconduct, ranging from withholding of exculpatory evidence pointing to other possible perpetrators, the manicuring of the testimony of prosecution witnesses, and the concealment of the criminal history of the state’s star witness. The defense lawyer’s performance in this case was also remarkably deficient, and included the introduction of a videotape that alleged that Hammond had committed additional uncharged murders. Trial counsel also failed to request a mistrial when the prosecutor argued to the jury that absent a death sentence, Hammond would be paroled. Although a mistrial would have been automatic under Georgia law had Hammond’s counsel requested it, the Georgia Supreme Court held that Hammond was not prejudiced by counsel’s failure to do so; it did so by hypothesizing that a new trial likely would also have ended in a sentence of death. The Georgia court rejected Hammond’s other claims as well. Hammond then sought federal habeas corpus relief, which was denied by the United States District Court. His appeal of the district court's judgment is pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Ramiro Hernandez-Llanas
Ramiro Hernandez-Llanas is a Mexican national who has been on death row in Texas since 2000. After the state courts denied his direct appeal and state habeas corpus challenges, the Project became involved to assist Mr. Hernandez-Llanas with his petition for federal habeas corpus relief. That petition is presently pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Among other claims, the petition alleges that Mr. Hernandez-Llanas, who literally grew up on a toxic waste dump in Mexico, is mentally retarded and therefore ineligible for execution under the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia.
Larry Matthew Puckett
Matt Puckett was convicted and sentenced to death in Harrison County, Mississippi. After a remand to the trial court for a hearing on whether the prosecution violated the Equal Protection Clause when it struck every African American from the pool of prospective jurors, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Mr. Puckett’s conviction and sentence, and later denied his request for post-conviction relief. Mr. Puckett then sought federal habeas corpus relief in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, raising challenges to the prosecutors’ conduct during jury selection, their use of Mr. Puckett’s post-arrest silence against him at trial, and several other issues. The district court denied relief, and the Project is assisting Mr. Puckett as he prepares an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Bobby Wayne Stone
Bobby Stone was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of a Sumter County, South Carolina Sherriff's Deputy. The Project is representing Mr. Stone in state post-conviction proceedings.
Freddie Eugene Owens
Freddie Owens was convicted and sentenced to death in 1999 for his alleged role in a Greenville, South Carolina convenience store robbery and murder. After two resentencing trials in 2003 and 2006, the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed his death sentence in 2008. With assistance from the Project, Mr. Owens is currently pursuing post-conviction relief in a South Carolina trial court.
Robert Sean Ingram
Sean Ingram was convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Talledega County, Alabama, which is the “buckle” of the Alabama death belt. The prosecution originally said it would not seek the death penalty against Sean, but when he balked at testifying against his first cousin and long time friend, the state sought, and obtained, a death sentence. His case is currently pending in state post-conviction proceedings. The Alabama Supreme Court is determining both whether a state post-conviction petition can be dismissed at the state’s request before counsel is appointed or any type of hearing is held and whether an order dismissing a death sentenced inmate’s state habeas petition can be upheld when there is uncontradicted evidence that the judge did not even so much as read the order prepared by the Attorney General before signing it.
Dwight Loving
Dwight Loving was sentenced to death by an Army court martial panel in Fort Hood, Texas. After years of litigation, see, e.g., Loving v. United States, 517 U.S. 748 (1996), Mr. Loving's case is currently pending before the Supreme Court of the United States on a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. If that petition is unsuccesful, Mr. Loving will seek federal habeas corpus review of his conviction and sentence of death.
Jamie Wilson
Mr. Wilson was tried and convicted for a school shooting resulting in the death of two young girls. The trial judge found that Mr. Wilson's mental illness rendered him unable to control the conduct for which he was charged, but nonetheless sentenced him to death. Clinic students have been involved in a number of issues in his case, but the highest profile issue concerns the constitutionality of imposing the death penalty for an offense the defendant was powerless to avoid committing. Student research determined that Mr. Wilson is the only person in the entire country who has been sentenced to death for an offense the fact-finder has determined was beyond his volitional control. Despite these efforts, all of Mr. Wilson's previous claims have been rejected. Students are assisting in a final effort to save Mr. Wilson's life on the issue of his competency to be executed.
PAST CASES
Herman Hughes
Herman Hughes was a 16 year old African-American teenager at the time of his involvement in a botched armed robbery in Calhoun County South Carolina. Herman also is mentally retarded and has organic brain damage. Herman's two older and more intelligent co-defendants were able to secure more favorable deals. Clinic students assisted in the presentation of his claims at his state post-conviction relief hearing and in the development of a variety of international law challenges to Herman's death sentence arising from his age, his mental retardation and racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty. Herman's death sentence was recently vacated and he was re-sentenced to life imprisonment.
Ringo Pearson
Ringo Pearson was charged along with several other men for his alleged involvement in the kidnapping, rape and murder of a young woman, but his trial was delayed after he was found incompetent to stand trial. Clinic students assisted in preparing for a hearing in June 2005 concerning Pearson's claim that he cannot be executed because he is mentally retarded. In the fall of 2005, a South Carolina state judge agreed that Pearson is ineligible for the death penalty under the guidelines of Atkins v. Virginia because he suffers from mental retardation. The state did not appeal and Mr. Pearson was resentenced to a term of years.
Keith Simpson
Keith Simpson was convicted of murder and armed robbery and sentenced to death in Spartanburg County South Carolina. Mr. Simpson is African-American and the victim was white. Clinic students have played a variety of roles in Mr. Simpson's case, but primarily they have assisted in data collection in support of a detailed statistical study of the administration of the death penalty in South Carolina's Seventh Judicial Circuit in an attempt to meet the concerns of such studies expressed by the United States Supreme Court in McCleskey v. Kemp. Preliminary results of the study reveal significant race effects based on the race of the victim and the race of the defendant. Students also assisted in the analysis of the prosecution's forensic evidence and the development of mitigating evidence which the jury did not hear. The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Simpson was entitled to a new trial on the robbery charge due to a Brady violation. The case was resolved through a plea bargain and Mr. Simpson was sentenced to life imprisonment.
OTHER CASES
In the last few years, efforts of students in the capital trial clinic were instrumental in securing life sentences for Shannon Ardis, Chavis Miller, Danny Ham, and Terrion Warren, all of whom were facing the death penalty.
