We all expect justice to be blind, otherwise it’s not justice at all. Yet the uneven playing field that characterizes the U.S. death penalty compromises the integrity of the entire justice system.
Only 2% of the counties in the U.S. are responsible for the majority of cases leading to executions since 1976. But do these cases truly involve the “worst of the worst” — or simply those with the worst lawyers or in the wrong geographic location?
A Lethal Lottery of Geography
- Where a crime occurs plays as big a role as the nature of the crime in determining who will live and who will die. Seeking the death penalty lies within the sole discretion of each District Attorney. Because of this, similar murders might get 40 years in one county and death in the next county over.
- Many states, like Ohio, Maryland, and Tennessee, have a large percentage of death sentences originate from just one or two counties.
- Geography plays a role across states and nationally as well. In 2012, over three-quarters of all executions took place in just four states.
- Fewer than 15% of all counties across the country have sent anyone to death row in the modern era.
No “dream team,” no defense?
- We’ve heard it in the movies a thousand times – “You have the right to an attorney.” But there is little guarantee in most states that poor defendants will receive competent defense.
- Our nation’s death penalty is littered with shocking examples of lawyers who were drunk, asleep, or later disbarred. Others have been represented by tax attorneys or lawyers fresh out of school. Some court-appointed lawyers can be so overworked or indifferent that they don’t even bother to defend their clients at all.
- Courts often allow the most egregious mistakes to stand. In the famous “sleeping lawyer” case of George McFarland, a Texas court ruled, “the Constitution guarantees the right to an attorney. It doesn’t say the lawyer has to be awake.”
Plagued by arbitrariness
- Individual prosecutors have broad discretion to decide when to seek the death penalty. Such discretion is one of the hallmarks of our nation’s legal system, but it can leave significant room for bias to seep into the decision making process.
- Many of the nation’s most high-profile murderers or serial killers don’t get the death penalty because they can afford better lawyers who negotiate deals.
- All murder is horrible, but the death penalty is often thought to be reserved for the “worst of the worst.” But we all have differing opinions on what counts as the worst – making it impossible to create a human system that is objective and consistent in selecting people for death.
Bad lawyers: Stories of a broken system
- Mose Young was executed in Missouri in 2001. His lawyer, Jack Walsh, saw Young just one time before the trial, never visited the crime scene, conducted no investigation or preparation, and failed to interview a witness who said Young was not the shooter. During the trial, Walsh came to court with a can of soda spiked with alcohol.
- Gary Nelson’s lawyer had never tried a capital case. He was paid less than $20 per hour and did not request any funds for an investigator. His closing argument was 255 words long – less than half the length of this fact sheet. Nelson was eventually exonerated and released.
- Jesús Romero was executed in Texas in 1992. His lawyer’s entire closing argument for the penalty phase of his trial was four sentences: “You are an extremely intelligent jury. You’ve got that man’s life in your hands. You can take it or not. That’s all I have to say.”
CASE STUDY: Tremane Wood
Tremane Wood was convicted and sentenced to death in Oklahoma in 2004. Tremane’s trial lawyer admitted in a sworn statement he was abusing alcohol while representing Tremane. There is also evidence that the lawyer was addicted to cocaine while representing Tremane.
Tremane’s trial lawyer admitted that he “did not have the time to adequately represent Tremane[,]” “did very little to investigate and prepare Mr. Wood’s case for trial[,]” and “met with him on a very limited basis and only when we were in court.” As a result of counsel’s failure to investigate and prepare, he presented no evidence in Tremane’s defense and the entire death penalty trial lasted for just six days with the penalty phase beginning and ending in one afternoon.
Tremane’s lawyer was paid just $10,000 total to defend Tremane–an amount that would have equated to less than $1.00 per hour if he had done the work required to adequately defend a capital case.
By contrast, Tremane’s brother—who admitted carrying out the killing—was represented by three experienced capital defense lawyers and two investigators with the Oklahoma Indigent Defense 2 System who successfully fought to defend him against the death penalty. That means the admitted killer was sentenced to life without parole while Tremane was sentenced to death.
Additional resources:
