Many in Florida have been following the capital case of William Wells. He’s been known in the media as "the Monster of Mayport" for years now. 

No Death Penalty: "A Vote for Humanity and Mercy" – Terry Lenamon

Terence Lenamon and co-counsel Tania Alavi of Ocala represented William Wells in his 2017 capital trial before the Honorable William Davis in Starke, Florida.  Lenamon Law associate Melissa Ortiz and mitigation specialist Kate O’Shea played pivotal roles in the defense team’s victory against death in this case. 

Result:  The jury did NOT vote for the death penalty.  In what Terry’s views as "… a vote for humanity and mercy," the jurors found that the balance between aggravators and mitigating factors did not warrant capital punishment.

Background from the Trial:

The State of Florida sought the death penalty for William Wells based upon the death of an inmate at the hands of William Wells and Wayne Doty.  Wells confessed to the killing.

Wells was incarcerated at the Florida State Prison at the time of this killing because of his prior conviction for five counts of 1st degree murder back in 2003. 

Wells pled guilty to killing his wife, his wife’s lover, her father, her brother, and a drug dealer over a time period covering 11 days.  All the bodies were kept in Wells’ trailer with him and his small son.  

With this background, how could Lenamon and his team convince the jury not to decide on death for this man? 

What swayed them?  Read the arguments for yourself.

Opening and Closing in the William Well’s Death Penalty Trial

First, there is the Opening Statement by Terry’s co-counsel Tania Z. Alavi in Terry’s Digital Library. 

Then, there were Terry’s Closing Arguments.  That part of the trial will be uploaded into the Digital Library once they’ve been transcribed and forwarded.

 

William Wells Penalty Phase Opening Statement by Lenamon co-counsel Tania Z. Alavi 

This week, the Marshall Project published an op-ed by Susannah Sheffer entitled "After Executions, Defense Attorneys Have Their Own Grief: a therapist on the emotional price lawyers pay to defend individuals sentenced to death."

 
As she points out so well, things are different for lawyers like Terry Lenamon who have dedicated their legal careers to defending men and women accused of capital crimes and for whom the prosecutor seeks the death penalty.  
 
Emotional Toll
 
There is the emotional toll that must be respected and cannot be underestimated when the death penalty defense attorney and his team does all that they can do, and still their client enters the execution chamber.  
 
From the article:
 
"Defense attorneys are not at the center of the death penalty story, but the penalty’s impact on these unique stakeholders is significant. It demands that we take seriously the wide-ranging implications of each execution."
 
Pressures of the Practicalities of the Practice
 
Another factor that adds more stress to the death penalty defense lawyer’s daily life which is not mentioned in her article is how these lawyers have to be savvy and smart in how they do their job, because they are dealing (for the most part) with indigent clients.  There’s not much money in the budget and there’s a life on the line.  
 
Defending against death in any scenario is emotionally harsh, but consider how difficult it is for the cases where you have to monitor how every single dime is spent and still maintain a standard of excellence?
 
Think about it.  
 
Indigent Defense in Capital Cases: Florida’s JAC
 
For more on this issue, see "Who is the JAC? What is JAC vs. Lenamon? Should You Care?" and read Terry’s amicus brief in Fletcher v. JAC for additional discussion. 

 

 Every so often, we recommend a book or movie or film that informs and educates about the complexity of issues involved in capital cases and the death penalty in America today.  

Today, we’re sharing a documentary that is available on Netflix right now.  

 It’s Into the Abyss (2011) directed by Werner Herzog 

 

 

Critics at Rotten Tomatoes rank this film 92% on the Tomatometer and 76% of the reporting audience at Rotten Tomatoes liked it.

What’s it about?  

From Rotten Tomatoes (quoting from the synopsis on the film’s site):

"In his fascinating exploration of a triple homicide case in Conroe, Texas, master filmmaker Werner Herzog probes the human psyche to explore why people kill-and why a state kills. In intimate conversations with those involved, including 28-year-old death row inmate Michael Perry (scheduled to die within eight days of appearing on-screen),

Herzog achieves what he describes as "a gaze into the abyss of the human soul." Herzog’s inquiries also extend to the families of the victims and perpetrators as well as a state executioner and pastor who’ve been with death row prisoners as they’ve taken their final breaths. As he’s so often done before, Herzog’s investigation unveils layers of humanity, making an enlightening trip out of ominous territory. — (C) Official Site"

This month, the Death Penalty Information Center shares a new podcast with its PowerPoint presentation, entitled "Does Capital Punishment Deter Murder?."

View the PowerPoint presentation here. 

Listen to the podcast here. 

In it, DPIC Fellow Seth Rose and Executive Director Robert Dunham detail research studies that reveal Death Penalty does not deter murders from being committed nor does it work to keep police officers safer than in states where capital punishment is not condoned.

 

 

Dunham explains:  "There’s no evidence that the death penalty deters murder and there’s no evidence that it protects the police. Murder rates may be affected by many things, but the death penalty doesn’t appear to be one of them."

 

Terence Lenamon fights against the death penalty as his life’s calling. This week, he is involved the jury selection for the William Wells case over in Starke.  (Wells is the man whom the media has dubbed the "Mayport Monster.")

And if you listen to the arguments of Dennis Prager in this video (which had over 887,000 videos at the time this post was published), then you get the idea just how hard Terry’s job can be.

Because there are people out there who think the death penalty is acceptable. And that today’s technology makes it almost impossible to convict and execute an innocent person.  

Just watch the other side’s position here.

Then, take comfort that people like Terence Lenamon and the folks at the Innocence Project are out there, hard at work.  

And maybe someone can point Mr. Prager to recent exposes that DNA isn’t all that reliable, crime labs and prosecutors do bad things, and that (as one example), Cameron Todd Willingham died an innocent man, executed for the arson death of his daughters. 

 

 Did you know that Terence Lenamon was on the faculty of the Trial Lawyer’s College founded by renowned trial lawyer Gerry Spence? 

The faculty list is here.  

What is the Trial Lawyer’s College?  

Here’s the mission statement from the site:

The Trial Lawyer’s College is dedicated to training and educating lawyers and judges who are committed to the jury system and to representing and obtaining justice for individuals; the poor, the injured, the forgotten, the voiceless, the defenseless and the damned, and to protecting the rights of such people from corporate and government oppression.

In all of its activities, the Trial Lawyer’s College will foster and nourish an open atmosphere of caring for people regardless of their race, age, creed, religion, national origin, physical abilities, gender or sexual orientation. 

TLC Kudos to Terry for Recent Result in Joshua Fulgham case

And here is the TLC post announcing Terry’s victory against the death penalty earlier this summer in the Fulgham case, written by Maren Chaloupka – TLC Faculty & ’99 Grad

Terry Lenamon (TLC ’11 7-Step Grad), death penalty warrior in Florida, saved the life of his client Josh this week – – after a lengthy, graphic and heartwrenching trial on both guilt and sentencing, Terry’s jury returned a verdict of LIFE for the damaged, despised man whom Terry placed into the jury’s hands.

The prosecutor used some prosecutorial version of TLC methods in his final argument of the sentencing phase of trial, reenacting parts of the kidnapping and murder for which Josh stood trial.  That Terry overcame that dramatic reenactment is a true testament to the power of love.

Folks, it doesn’t get any more real than this.  This man would be damned to the needle if not for Terry.  I am amazed and so proud to have him in our group.

Here is a link to a news write up about this case:  Jury: Life for Fulgham

Here is a link to a TV story on this case: Joshua Fulgham Gets Life

 

This week in Florida, there were two major events involving capital punishment in the Sunshine State.

1.  Asay Execution With Etomidate

First, the execution of Florida Death Row inmate Mark James Asay was carried out on August 24, 2017.

This was the first execution by the State of Florida in over 19 months.  Executions have been on hold in Florida after the SCOTUS decision in Hurst ruled the Florida capital punishment statute unconstitutional.

It was also the first execution to use a new three-drug lethal injection protocol, as the Asay execution involved the use of the drug etomidate.

2.  Lack of Unanimity Denies State the Death Penalty in Kendrick Silver Trial

This week, the capital murder trial of Kendrick Silver when to a jury in Miami.  And because one single juror could not agree that Silver should be executed for his crimes, there can be no death penalty in his case.

This is the first death penalty case that has been tried to completion in Miami since the new Florida death penalty law was passed by the Florida Legislature  earlier this year.  

The new statute had to be passed into law because of the SCOTUS decision in Hurst.  

Under the new law, which requires all the jurors agree on the death penalty as the appropriate sentence, the power of a single juror is great.  As is shown in this case, where the hold-out juror found that there were sufficient mitigating circumstances to shield the defendant from death.

Foe more on mitigation in a death penalty case, read:

 

Of course, the biggest result of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision this week in Asay v. Florida is its failure to block the impeding execution of Mark James Asay.  

Read the full opinion here: Asay v. State, No. SC17-1400 (Fla. Aug. 14, 2017).

Asay Execution Remains Scheduled for August 24, 2017

The State of Florida has scheduled this execution for August 24, 2017.  This week’s Florida Supreme Court opinion will not block that from happening.

It will be the first execution in the State of Florida in many months (over a year and a half), since executions were halted here after SCOTUS ruled that the Florida death penalty statute was unconstitutional.

Impact on Florida Death Row Inmates’ Review of Death Sentences 

After SCOTUS’s ruling in Hurst v. Florida, the Florida Legislature revised the state capital punishment laws twice.  This year, a new statute became effective that mandates juries be unanimous in their recommendation of a sentence of death.

As we have discussed earlier, one result of the SCOTUS ruling meant that Florida Death Row inmates might have legal arguments for re-sentencing and life sentences on constitutional grounds.

The Asay opinion by the Florida Supreme Court did not agree with Asay’s constitutional arguments — although the sole dissenter, Justice Barbara Pariente, did find merit in them.  Specifically, that the cut-off date for determining which Florida Death Row inmates should be allowed re-sentencing hearings is unconstitutional.  

Justice Pariente dissents, agreeing with Petitioner Asay that all Florida Death Row inmates who were sentenced to death in jury trials without unanimous recommendations for death should get a new sentencing hearing.  

Lethal Injection Protocol for State of Florida

This new opinion in Asay is also important for the Florida Supreme Court’s declination to consider Asay’s arguments about:

(1) the State of Florida’s decision to use a new drug in its lethal injection method of execution (etomidate) and

(2) its use of a three drug cocktail and not a single drug in the execution process.

 

Next month, the death penalty trial of William Wells is set to begin in Bradford County, Florida, on September 4, 2017.  

You may recognize this case as the "Mayport Monster" case.  Terence Lenamon is defense counsel for William Wells.  

Of interest here to many:  this is another defendant facing the death penalty who suffers from mental disability.  

How Does the Defense Get Death Penalty Excluded From Possible Sentence?

It’s the job of the defense team to fight for these defendants after the prosecutor has notified everyone that the government is seeking the death penalty.

So, how does this get argued in a capital case?  A Motion is filed by the defense, and heard by the judge.  The motion is the official request to have the death penalty taken on the table by the judge.

The judge then makes a decision and rules, in an Order signed by the judge that either grants or denies the relief.

In the Wells’ case, Terence Lenamon’s motion to exclude the death penalty has been denied.  It has been placed into the Terence Lenamon Online Library.  

Here is that motion as it was filed in the court record, for those of you interested in this issue and those who may be interested in how the actual motion reads: 

 

 In our last post, we discussed the upcoming August 2017 trial of James Bannister and gave some background information for the continuance motion filed and argued by Terence Lenamon as defense counsel for Mr. Bannister.  

It looked pretty solid then that the trial would begin this month.  

Things have changed.  

Continuance Motion Granted: Bannister Trial Rescheduled

Terry Lenamon filed another motion for continuance, and it has been granted.  Now the trial is scheduled to begin in October.  

For details, read today’s coverage in the Ocala Star Banner in an article written by Katie Pohlman entitled "Quadruple murder trial pushes to October."

Just one more lesson in how complex these capital cases are — not only factually, but procedurally.

What’s happened?  

As you will discover if you read the Ocala article, the Judge announced that there are two reasons for the trial delay.

1.  The Medical Examiner’s Schedule; and 

2.  The 11 Motions to Suppress Evidence filed by Lenamon.

Judge Pope, as quoted in the news piece, stated from the bench that both sides have "put forth a valiant effort" to get the case to trial.  

An Alibi Defense

One other factor here:  the defense’s need for additional time to investigate an alibi defense.  That’s right: an ALIBI.  

 

Update 08/10/2017

 

The Fourth Motion for Continuance (and the earlier motions as well) have been added to the Terence Lenamon Online Library.

For those of you interested in reading the actual filed motion (or to learn what a continuance motion looks like in Florida death penalty cases), here it is: