Defending those facing the death penalty brings Terry Lenamon into the heart of the issue of mental illness in this country and how that does (as opposed to should) impact the imposing of capital punishment on those convicted of serious crimes.

Mental Illness is an Issue in All Death Penalty Cases

We discuss aspects of mental illness and the death penalty regularly on this blog, because it is key to both the determination of guilt as well as the sentencing phase of any death penalty case and goes to mitigation issues. 

See:

SCOTUS REFUSES TO STAY EXECUTIONS EVEN IF MENTAL ILLNESS UNDISPUTED

U.S. Supreme Court Deciding Major Death Penalty Case Regarding Intellectual Ability and Capital Punishment: the Case of Freddie L. Hall

Schizophrenia Doesn’t Stop Execution of Mentally Ill Florida Death Row Inmate John Errol Ferguson This Week

SCOTUS on Mentally Ill and Death Penalty 

The Supreme Court of the United States has considered the issue of execution for those convicted of capital crimes but who are mentally ill either at the time the crime was committed or at the time of the scheduled execution. 

See:

Ford v. Wainwright 

SCOTUS ruled it is unconstitutional to execute someone who suffers from a mental illness and cannot understand that they are facing death or the reasons why the government seeks to execute them.

Atkins v. Virginia 

SCOTUS held the government cannot execute someone with severe mental disability.

 

For legal analysis, see Schaaf, Rosalind. "The Death Penalty and Wrongful Convictions of the Mentally Disabled in America." Legal Studies Master’s Degree: Criminal Law.(2017). 

 

Resources for Study of Mental Illness and Capital Punishment

However, for those wanting to educate themselves with an overview of how mental illness does and does not impact the ability of the prosecutor to seek the death penalty as well as the power of the state to execute those who are clearly mentally ill, we offer the following for study:

1 Death Penalty Information Center on Mental Illness and the US Death Penalty

Collection of resources discussing various aspects of this issue, including case examples of the mentally ill who faced execution in this country.  

2.  Amnesty International Article "Death Penalty and Mental Illness"

Discussion of how mentally ill are executed in the United States with a link to Amnesty International’s full report.  

3.  Mental Health America’s Position Paper on Mental Illness and the Death Penalty

Position given on why capital punishment is not appropriate for those suffering from mental illness. 

4.  National Alliance on Mental Illness Position Policy on Death Penalty for Mentally Ill

Policy paper on why the death penalty is not appropriate for those who are mentally ill. 

 

 The American Bar Association has adopted a formal resolution regarding the Death Penalty as well as publishing its report in support of the resolution.

You can read the full report here.  

The 2018 ABA Resolution on Death Penalty

Here is the full text of the resolution here, drafted by the ABA’s Civil Rights and Social Justice Section:

RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association, without taking a position supporting or opposing the death penalty, urges each jurisdiction that imposes capital punishment to prohibit the imposition of a death sentence on or execution of any individual who was 21 years old or younger at the time of the offense.

Notice that the ABA does NOT go so far as to oppose capital punishment.  They are not moving to abolish the death penalty here.

Adolescence and Death Penalty 

The ABA is urging that young people should be dealt a different hand when it comes to capital punishment, because of their adolescence.  From the report:

It is now both appropriate and necessary to address the issue of late adolescence and the death penalty because of the overwhelming legal, scientific, and societal changes of the last three decades. The newly-understood similarities between juvenile and late adolescent brains, as well as the evolution of death penalty law and relevant standards under the Eighth Amendment lead to the clear conclusion that individuals in late adolescence should be exempted from capital punishment.18 Capital defense attorneys are increasingly making this constitutional claim in death penalty litigation and this topic has become part of ongoing juvenile and criminal justice policy reform conversations around the country. As the ABA is a leader in protecting the rights of the vulnerable and ensuring that our justice system is fair, it is therefore incumbent upon this organization to recognize the need for heightened protections for an additional group of individuals: offenders whose crimes occurred while they were 21 years old or younger.

– ABA Report page 3.

 

Beginning February 5, 2018, Terence Lenamon will be in a Miami Dade courtroom in another fight against the death penalty, this time in a notorious capital case involving a member of the Terrorist Boyz named Frantzy Jean-Marie.

Capital Case Trying Charges From Over a Decade Ago

It’s a complicated defense for many reasons, not the least of which is that Frantzy Jean-Marie was among several men charged with nine different murders in Miami-Dade County over a decade ago. The others, collectively known as “the Terrorist Boyz” in the news coverage, are Benson Cadet, Johnny Charles, Max Daniel, and Robert St. Germaine.

Of note: the Terrorist Boyz’ collective capital defense has gained the reputation as being “Florida’s most expensive death penalty case” as discussed in an article by David Ovalle and Nicholas Nehamas entitled, “The Death-Penalty Cases Rack Up Big Dollars In Miami-Dade,” published by the Miami Herald on October 2, 2016.

Indigent Defense Costs in Death Penalty Cases

In that article, Terry explains: “In many places in Florida, there is very little spent on the death penalty and there is a rush to complete the cases. I have the responsibility to make sure no stone is left unturned. It’s a very expensive proposition, but there is a simple solution: End the death penalty.”

He goes into even more detail about his motivation to represent defendants facing death in capital cases here, specifically referencing Mr. Jean-Marie among others in the post Sometimes You Need To Stop and Survey the Territory When You’re a Criminal Defense Attorney Representing People Facing Death.

It’s an important read when considering next week’s capital case, as well as any death penalty defense matter in Florida (or elsewhere).

For more on indigent defense matters, check out:

1.  our e-book to learn more about the money aspects of capital cases in The Death Penalty Indigent Defense Crisis: Representing the Poor when the State wants to Kill Them and It’s Paying Your Bill and 

2. Terry’s memoir to learn more about Terry’s personal experience in defending those accused of capital crimes and the life of a death penalty defense lawyer in Heinous, Atrocious & Cruel: The Casebook of a Death Penalty Attorney.

 

 

 Two years ago, in January 2016, SCOTUS issued its decision in Hurst v. Florida and now, in January 2018, the Florida Supreme Court has issued its rulings in over two dozen requests by Florida Death Row inmates for new sentencing hearings based upon Hurst’s concerns regarding non-unanimous sentencing recommendations under the old Florida death penalty statute. 

These decisions have been released all this week (Jan 22 -24). More are expected. 

For details on Hurst, read our prior discussions here.

In short, the Florida Supreme Court is denying these Death Row inmates new sentencing hearings. 

The Court is using June 24, 2002, as its bright line. 

That’s the date that  SCOTUS came down with Ring v. Arizona, opining that the constitutional right to a jury trial  includes defendants facing the death penalty to have their jury find all facts that are necessary for a death sentence to be imposed.

The FSC holds Ring created new law and would not be retroactively applied to cases where direct appeals had been completed before Ring came down.

For details, read the coverage by Orlando Sentinel on January 22, 2018, entitled, "Florida Supreme Court rejects 10 Death Row appeals at same time." and the article by Stephanie Brown for WOKV-TV entitled, "FLORIDA SUPREME COURT LETS STAND DOZENS OF DEATH SENTENCES, INCLUDING 11 FROM THE FIRST COAST," which was published today. 

To read the entire SCOTUS opinion in Hurst v. Florida, go here. 

 

Recently, Scott Glovsky interviewed Terry Lenamon for Trial Lawyer Talk.

Interview of Death Penalty Defense Lawyer Terence Lenamon

Included in the interview is a discussion of Terry’s recent representation of Byron Burch.

Terry’s client faced prosecutors seeking his death based upon a guilty verdict in the particularly violent murder of Brooksville schoolteacher Sarah Davis.

As described in the Trial Lawyer Talk coverage, you’ll hear Terry discuss things like:

  • What it feels like to have a mans life in your own hands
  • The synopsis of Terry’s clients’ story (Byron Burch)
  • Childhood, Addictions, & Psychic Problems
  • How Capital Cases are distinctly different from other trial cases
  • Using integrated case approach
  • Florida litigation requirements have changed in the past couple years and will change again
  • Aggregating factors surrounding Terry’s client
  • How Terry uses TLC methods in his cases
  • How the public sees “The Death Penalty”

 

Listen to the Terence Lenamon Interview for more.  It’s thirty minutes long and gives an excellent glimpse into Terry’s calling of representing those whom the government has decided are worthy of execution: 

 

 The Marshall Project has published its analysis of the state of the Death Penalty as we enter into 2018.  See, "What to Know About the Death Penalty in 2018," by Maurice Chammah of the Marshall Project and published in the ABA Journal.

It’s a good read. Taking everything that has happened – and which we know will be happening this year (like the pending SCOTUS decisions), the Marshall Project has collected them into four specific areas:

1. The Supreme Court of the United States

There’s a great discussion on what might happen if Justice Kennedy retires.  And while Florida is still dealing with Hurst v. Florida, and now we’ve got Hidalgo v. Arizona pending before the High Court.  

See:  "Will SCOTUS Hear Hidalgo v Arizona and End the Death Penalty?"

2. The Attorney General for the United States

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is all for the death penalty. That’s not news.  But the article has some interesting discussion on his dropping of the death penalty back in Alabama.  And how there is a way Sessions could "speed up executions in the states."

3. The States (Florida and Texas playing a big part here)

Big issue here, really, is getting those lethal injection drugs in order to carry out executions.  The Marshall Project points to fentanyl being used, and how the FDA blocked importing drugs from India.

See:

 4. The Counties in those States 

There are certain counties in Florida and Texas that are hot beds for death penalty issues.  Among them, the state attorneys prosecuting cases in Tampa and Orlando.  Can they implement their own ban on capital punishment simply by failing to file a notice of intent to seek the death penalty?  

Another interesting thing to ponder in the Marshall Project synopsis:  what about life without parole? How merciful is it, or it is just as cruel as death, or even more so?  

 Here is the transcript of the closing argument made by Terence Lenamon in the death penalty case of James Edward Bannister.  

Lenamon Closing Argument in Death Penalty Phase:  

The jury did note vote for death after hearing this argument.  Why not?  Read it for yourself.

For more on the James Bannister case, read:

Opening Statements and Closing Arguments in James Bannister Death Penalty Trial (guilt phase)

James Bannister Victory and Florida Death Penalty in 2018

_________________________________________

Death Penalty Closing Arguments in the Penalty Phase of James Bannister