THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, February 25, 1995 TAG: 9502250229
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY LAURA LAFAY, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Medium: 68 lines
Death row inmates who challenge their sentences will face more obstacles and tighter deadlines under a new bill approved by the General Assembly this week.
The bill passed 33-7 in the Senate and 86-12 in the House of Delegates, and was mostly opposed by members of the Legislative Black Caucus. Proponents such as Del. Clarence E. Phillips (D-Cas-tle-wood) say it will save taxpayers' money by streamlining the appeals process and enabling the state to execute inmates faster.
``This is a good bill. The public is demanding that this process be shortened,'' Phillips said Friday.
``My constituents feel the state is spending too much money on legal fees and on keeping the death row inmates (in prison).
``It's an additional burden that the taxpayers shouldn't have to bear.''
But Del. Kenneth R. Melvin (D-Portsmouth), who voted against the bill, was bitter about its passage and critical of his fellow lawmakers for supporting it.
``They just want to fry more people,'' he said. ``. . . Folks just perceived it as being a law-and-order bill and went along with the program. It's an election year.''
Melvin and other critics say the bill hurts defendants by giving them only 60 days to prepare and file the most critical document of any post-conviction case: the state petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Under current law, the document may be filed at any time.
The habeas petition - essentially a presentation of a defendant's claims that a death sentence was imposed in violation of the U.S. Constitution - is filed after the rejection of the first appeal.
It must contain every claim and argument the defendant plans to use in future litigation. Except in rare circumstances, any claim not included is barred forever from future state and federal proceedings.
Forcing inmates' attorneys - most of whom are court-appointed and inexperienced in post-conviction work - to file the petition in 60 days ``lays the groundwork for failure throughout the process,'' said Gerald T. Zerkin, a Richmond lawyer who defends death row inmates and lobbies for the Virginia College of Criminal Defense Attorneys.
``It's going to make the process less fair because they don't have the time to do their jobs correctly,'' said Zerkin.
``And it's going to make it much easier for the attorney general's office to get petitions dismissed on technicalities.''
``The purpose of this process is to enable us to find cases where trial lawyers truly did not do their jobs; to find cases in which prosecutors are guilty of misconduct; to find people who are, in fact, innocent . . . This is our way of assuring ourselves that our criminal justice system works . . . It's a safety net. And we're punching a big hole in it.''
Sen. Thomas K. Norment (R-Williamsburg), a former criminal defense attorney who introduced the bill, took issue with Zerkin's assessment of it.
``I don't feel it prejudices the defendants at all,'' he said. ``Because procedurally, the guy has been through trial, been found guilty and sentenced to death. The guy appeals. He has an automatic appeal under the law. And that appeal is rejected. Then he files a (petition for a writ of) habeas corpus with the state. Then he files one with the federal courts. So there are ample opportunities for the courts to review these cases.''
The bill has been sent to Gov. George F. Allen. He is expected to sign it.
KEYWORDS: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT APPEAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY
CONVICTION by CNB