Three cheers for the Supreme Court

[dburkhead]

And, in this case, including (in the spirit of credit where credit is due) Sotomayer and Ginsberg.

Needless Suffering - Jack Dunphy - The Corner on National Review Online

The ninth circuit had halted a death penalty sentence imposed on Fernando Belmontes, in part because his bludgeoning to death Steacy McConnell supposedly did not inflict "needless suffering."

He beat her to death with a dumbell. She tried to defend herself from the beating (evidenced by bruised on her arms and hands. And even then, she didn't go quickly and was still alive when officers found her later.

All that over about $100 worth of stuff which he stole.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court restored the death penalty in this case.

 

[Cygnus]

Good for all of them!

Was this a unanimous decision?
I don't care about the perp's childhood issues or his conversion to Christianity. I don't give a fuuuuuuuuuugh! Execute him quick!

 

[dburkhead]

Good for all of them!

Was this a unanimous decision?
I donlt care abiut the per's childhood issues or his coversion to Christianity. I don;t give a fuuuuuuuuuugh! Execute him quick!

"In a unanimous decision."

 

[Bigum1969]

What would the Ninth District define as "needless suffering"?

 

[Ter]

Love it when justice prevails.

 

[Bigum1969]

Love it when justice prevails.

You have to savor these rare moments.

 

[Cygnus]

"In a unanimous decision."

Aha! I see. Also you have imortalized by pre-spelling corrected post. Dang!

 

[bigiron]

good for them. alright, for every one good decision they screw up three. so whats on the agenda next.

 

[SC_Shooter]

I'm all for giving credit where credit is due. Regardless of the politics and craziness that a few of them bring to the bench, everyone stepped up and did the right thing on this one.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

"So now the caretaker's the undertaker so I'm gonna go and get a Peacemaker..."

I'm glad that for once, justice has prevailed.

Here's to hoping they hang him high.

 

[kevinj110]

This needs to happen for everyone convicted of murder.

 

[Fletch]

This needs to happen for everyone convicted of murder.

I'd rather it happened for everyone guilty of murder.

 

[Lex Concord]

What would the Ninth District define as "needless suffering"?

Reading the Constitution.

 

[Bubba]

The ninth circuit had halted a death penalty sentence imposed on Fernando Belmontes, in part because his bludgeoning to death Steacy McConnell supposedly did not inflict "needless suffering."

30 minutes of reading the darn opinion and I don't see it...

CONCLUSION

Although we are disturbed by the prosecution's failure to disclose impeaching evidence and to correct false testimony on the part of its principal witness, as well as by defense counsel's failure to disclose the [*117] extent of his prior representation of Vasquez and to pursue a full investigation of Vasquez's background, and although we are at least as disturbed by the results of the study that showed the discriminatory racial effect of the County's capital charging policies, we cannot conclude, for the reasons we have explained, that any of these occurrences served to violate Belmontes' constitutional rights. Thus, we are compelled to deny relief with respect to the guilt phase, including the special circumstances finding. However, because the trial judge failed to instruct the jury that it was required to consider Belmontes' principal mitigation evidence, and because we conclude that this failure had a substantial and injurious effect upon the verdict, we reverse with respect to the sentencing phase. We remand to the district court with instructions to issue an appropriate writ vacating Belmontes' death sentence.

 

[Bill of Rights]

What would the Ninth District define as "needless suffering"?

One of them being the victim.

 

[BloodEclipse]

What would the Ninth District define as "needless suffering"?

Criminals having to pay for their crimes.
That or victims actually seeing justice served.

 

[Fletch]

30 minutes of reading the darn opinion and I don't see it...

Originally Posted by Belmontes v. Woodford, 9th circuit, 2003
CONCLUSION

Although we are disturbed by the prosecution's failure to disclose impeaching evidence and to correct false testimony on the part of its principal witness, as well as by defense counsel's failure to disclose the [*117] extent of his prior representation of Vasquez and to pursue a full investigation of Vasquez's background, and although we are at least as disturbed by the results of the study that showed the discriminatory racial effect of the County's capital charging policies, we cannot conclude, for the reasons we have explained, that any of these occurrences served to violate Belmontes' constitutional rights. Thus, we are compelled to deny relief with respect to the guilt phase, including the special circumstances finding. However, because the trial judge failed to instruct the jury that it was required to consider Belmontes' principal mitigation evidence, and because we conclude that this failure had a substantial and injurious effect upon the verdict, we reverse with respect to the sentencing phase. We remand to the district court with instructions to issue an appropriate writ vacating Belmontes' death sentence.

Reps for actual research rather than pontificating blind.