Arizona Capital Representation Project

CAPITAL DEFENSE TRAINING PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT
for trial practitioners in Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona and Mississippi

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), with
the National Consortium  for Capital Defense Training, announce a
“Bring-Your-Own-Case” CAPITAL DEFENSE TRAINING for capital defense
practitioners in Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, and Mississippi
on December 1-3, 2011, at Prairie View A&M University,  Prairie View,
Texas (about an hour from Houston).
The costs of registration and materials, as well as food, travel and
accommodations expenses, are covered by the grant, and so the training
is free of charge to attendees.
Confirmed faculty include Marc Bookman, David Bruck, Dick Burr, Dana
Cook, John Holdridge, Linda Mroz, John Niland, Teresa Norris, Danalynn
Recer,  Odalys Rojas, Russ Stetler, Craig Washington,  and Kathy
Wayland.
Attendance is limited to defense practitioners with a pending state
capital trial case.   At least two members of the trial case team
(attorney and mitigation specialist; attorney and investigator;
co-counsel, etc.) must attend together.  (Additional members of the
team can also attend).   Without exception, all participants are
expected to attend all sessions and to fill out post-training
evaluation forms.
The training will include approximately 35 participants who will
work closely with faculty in large group plenary sessions and small
group workshops utilizing a client-centered approach.  Using the ABA
Guidelines for Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death
Penalty Cases and the Supplementary Guidelines for the Mitigation
Function of Defense Teams in Death Penalty Cases, the primary focus
will be on developing a theory for life.
Topics to be addressed in the training will include brainstorming the
case, effective teamwork, investigation and presentation of mitigation
evidence, integrating the guilt-innocence and penalty phases, mental
health issues, race and culture on the team and in the case, plea
negotiation and settlement, and obtaining adequate time and resources
for effective representation.  Because of time constraints, the
curriculum will not include coverage of capital jury selection or
extensive guilt-innocence phase issues.
We intend to apply for CLE credit for this program.
This training is funded by a grant from the United States Bureau of
Justice Assistance, an agency of the United States Department of
Justice.
We hope you are able to take advantage of this unique, intensive
opportunity.  Register soon as space is limited.
Please forward this announcement to individual attorneys who might be
interested in attending the program.
For more information and to register (preferably by email), contact:

John Holdridge, Capital Defense Training Counsel
National Consortium for Capital Defense Training
153 Boulevard Heights
Athens, GA  30601
(706) 850-0684
(917) 496-4267 cell
(706) 850-0684 fax
moc.liamgnull@nhojegdirdloh

The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and death sentence this morning in State v. Lehr. The opinion includes a fairly outrageous jury misconduct claim, arising from the jurors’ applauding a state’s witness and giving a thumbs up to one of the victims. The opinion is below.

2011-07-13 Lehr Opinion

Yesterday the 9th Circuit ruled that Richard Hurles is entitled to a new sentencing hearing on a claim of judicial bias.  The judge who presided over Mr. Hurles’ trial and capital sentencing became an adversary in his case by actively participating in a pre-trial interlocutory appeal. The opinion is below.

Hurles v. Ryan

Yesterday Texas executed Humberto Leal, a Mexican national who had been denied his right to consular assistance under the Vienna Convention.  For more information please visit www.humbertoleal.org

This morning the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence in State v. Styers.  Justice Hurwitz dissented, finding the case should be remanded for a jury sentencing.  Notably, both the majority and the dissent believe the 9th Circuit incorrectly granted relief after finding the Arizona Supreme Court had committed a Tennard violation.

2011-07-01 Styers Opinion

On May 24, the Arizona Supreme Court issued a temporary stay of execution for Donald Beaty to allow for oral argument on the State’s last-minute switch in lethal injection drugs.  This afternoon, the Court lifted the stay, finding that Mr. Beaty would not be able to prove a substantial risk of injury due to the switch.

On Friday, the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence in State v. Dixon and the death sentence in State v. Prince. The Court’s opinions are below.

State v. Dixon

State v. Prince

Jeff Toobin of the New Yorker recently profiled Danalynn Recer of the Gulf Region Advocacy Center in Houston, Texas.  The Arizona Capital Representation Project had the pleasure of hosting Danalynn and two of her mitigation specialists at our Mitigation Intensive seminar in April.  For more information about Danalynn, GRACE, and their incredible work, please visit www.gracelaw.org.

The Mitigator

The Arizona Supreme Court issued its opinion in a special action this morning regarding the victims’ right to be present at ex parte proceedings.  The Court vacated the Court of Appeals’ decision, which held that victims do have the right, pursuant to Arizona’s Victims Bill of Rights, to be present at ex parte proceedings where the defendant has the right to be present.  The Arizona Supreme Court determined that the proceeding in question was purely procedural, and, therefore, neither the defendant nor the victims had the right to be present.  Natman Schaye of the Arizona Capital Representation Project appeared as Amicus on behalf of the Project and numerous capital resource centers and other indigent defense groups.

2011-04-29 Morehart Opinion

The Supreme Court has granted a stay of execution for Cleve Foster, a Texas death row inmate, pending the disposition of the petition for rehearing of the Court’s order denying cert in January.  Mr. Foster had raised the issue of the constitutional adequacy of state post-conviction counsel.