« Brennan Center produces short piece "Analyzing the First Step Act’s Impact on Criminal Justice" | Main | "Rethinking the Role of Intentional Wrongdoing in Criminal Law" »
August 21, 2024
Notable battle over death row defendant's innocence claim in Missouri
The New York Times has this new piece, headlined "Prosecutors to Face Off Over Innocence Claim by Prisoner on Death Row," reporting on the people behind a notable legal fight surrounding a defendant scheduled to be executed by the state of Missouri next month. Here is how it starts:
A man facing execution in Missouri next month will be in court on Wednesday for what could be his last chance to prove his innocence.
The guilt of the man, Marcellus Williams, has been challenged for years, and he has come close to execution twice. But the hearing on Wednesday in St. Louis County will be the first time that a court will consider DNA evidence that could exonerate him.
The case is notable because it has put two law enforcement officials, the local prosecutor and the state attorney general, on opposite sides. The prosecutor, Wesley Bell, supports Mr. Williams’s bid for exoneration and has filed a 63-page motion to overturn his conviction. The attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has argued that Wednesday’s hearing should not even take place.
Mr. Bell, a Democrat, recently defeated U.S. Representative Cori Bush in the Democratic primary for her House seat in a heavily Democratic district, so he will very likely be heading to Congress in January. Mr. Bailey, a Republican who was appointed to his office midterm to fill a vacancy, fended off a primary challenge this month and is also likely to win the general election in the deeply red state.
In his short time in office, Mr. Bailey has opposed three wrongful-conviction claims, going so far as to try to keep people in prison after they have been exonerated. In the Williams case, he has asked both the trial court and the State Supreme Court to block the hearing.
UPDATE: Thanks to a helpful commentor, I see there is new breaking news in this case: "Missouri death row inmate agrees to new plea in deal that calls for life without parole." The latest:
A Missouri death row inmate on Wednesday dropped his innocence claim and entered a new no-contest plea in an agreement that calls for a revised sentence of life in prison without parole.
But the Missouri Attorney General’s Office opposes the new consent judgment and will appeal in an effort to move ahead with the scheduled Sept. 24 execution of Marcellus Williams.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Via CBS/AP, "Missouri Supreme Court blocks agreement that would have halted execution of death row inmate Marcellus Williams"
August 21, 2024 at 09:52 AM | Permalink
Comments
It is also notable because, in denying a stay of execution, the Missouri Supreme Court gave an advisory opinion that the current motion is meritless. (https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=209675). That is a good hint that, even if the trial court rules in Mr. Williams's favor, that the Missouri Supreme Court would reverse any grant of relief. (And contrary to the story, it is not the first time that a court will consider the DNA evidence. The Missouri Supreme Court previously appointed a special master to review a habeas petition which included the DNA evidence and denied that habeas petition after the special master took evidence on the claims.)
The Missouri Supreme Court is letting the hearing proceed, despite a request by the AG to block the hearing, but that is apparently because the statute requires a hearing and, in this case, there was enough time for a hearing prior to the execution date.
Posted by: tmm | Aug 21, 2024 11:05:29 AM
Just another reminder why good character and conscience is so important in elected officials who wield vast authority. We all know Trump often lacks that, although he did offer many clemencies, but Kamala's very troubling past in the same area has suddenly been suppressed by many of the usual critics even though it was extensively discussed during the last presidential campaign, see e.g.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
It is beyond sickening how far so many politicians will go to totally destroy people's lives in order to advance their own careers.
Posted by: Respondent | Aug 21, 2024 11:49:52 AM
His execution would be a grave injustice for him and his loved ones. But there is an upside. Given that there is no reasonable doubt of his innocence, he will become the poster boy for the anti-death-penalty folks. That should silence those, such as Mr. Otis, who claim that nobody has been wrongfully executed in the US in the past several decades.
Except, of course, that they will just insist that he was guilty, despite all the evidence. The same as they do with Cameron Todd Willingham.
Posted by: Keith Lynch | Aug 21, 2024 2:50:48 PM
Sure looks to me like an innocent man is facing execution for a murder he had nothing to do with. I am disgusted by the AG pushing the idea that there should be no hearing.
I will say that the news stories contain no suggestion that Williams was innocent of the previous armed robbery. He is therefore partly responsible for his own predicament. One risk you run when you commit a serious crime is that it will lead to you being charged for a different serious crime, even one you didn't commit. That seems to have happened here.
But that does not excuse the AG. Stare Decisis should not be a suicide pact. And when looking at this type of claim, one has got to also look at the strength of the evidence underlying the conviction. In this case, it's weak.
This claim that the lack of Williams' DNA on the knife does not prove his innocence could be true. For example, Williams could have been a party, while another, as-yet-undiscovered, actor did the actual stabbing. Alternatively, it is possible that the unknown DNA was deposited on the knife prior to the crime. But one should not proceed with an execution based on speculative theories such as these. For that matter, one should not even keep Williams in prison.
Posted by: William Jockusch | Aug 21, 2024 3:17:36 PM
Things just got weird in this case.
Apparently, the local prosecutor and Williams, over the A.G.'s objection agreed to set aside the death penalty and resentence him to life without parole.
Williams abandoned his actual innocence claim and reached a settlement based on the previously rejected claims of constitutional error.
I am not sure how you can have a consent judgment when one of the three parties does not consent.
Posted by: tmm | Aug 21, 2024 5:40:45 PM
Many, many thanks, tmm. I have updated the post with this latest news. Interesting times.
Posted by: Doug B | Aug 21, 2024 6:14:51 PM
Isn't "may you live in interesting times" a curse??? It sure seems so for Williams
Posted by: John | Aug 22, 2024 12:03:09 AM
What a monstrous injustice. When someone pleads guilty because
someone threatened them with death if they don't, and they knew that
the threat was for real, what is that supposed to prove? All it
proves is that we're ruled by cruel and evil tyrants, from whom none
of us are safe.
If a mugger were to point a gun at your head, and not just demand your
wallet, but also demand that you falsely admit that the wallet is
rightfully his and that you stole it from him, would that make him
innocent of robbery, on the grounds that you *admitted* the wallet
was his? I don't think so.
I see that the prosecutors are claiming that the DNA must have come
from another prosecutor accidentally handling the knife. But he
doesn't claim to have determined which one. All he knows is that
the DNA doesn't match the prisoner's. And since he "knows" that
the prisoner is guilty, the DNA *must* be meaningless contamination.
They do have a point. It's not *impossible* that the prisoner is
guilty. In the same sense as it's not impossible that I'm guilty of
assassinating JFK. I was in school a thousand miles away at the time,
but the school probably doesn't still have attendance records dating
back that far. Even if they do, they could be faked or mistaken.
It's not impossible that my younger brother is guilty of assassinating
JFK. He wasn't born until four years later, but his birth certificate
could be faked, and I could be lying about when he was born.
Any competent DA could convict any non-wealthy person of killing JFK.
A truly great DA could convict any person, wealthy or not, of killing
Lincoln.
At least they let the prisoner take an Alford plea, i.e. continue to
insist on his innocence while pleading guilty.
Posted by: Keith Lynch | Aug 22, 2024 8:11:54 AM
Additional information.
Last night the Attorney General filed a writ application to block the resentencing. In the writ application, the AG indicated additional DNA test results from Monday showed that the DNA on which Williams relies came from the lead case detective.
The Missouri Supreme Court issued an order blocking the resentencing and directing the trial judge to either vacate the consent judgment or explain how the consent judgment does not violate the statute governing this type of proceeding which requires the local prosecutor to produce evidence supporting the actual innocence claims and grants the AG the right to challenge that evidence.
Posted by: tmm | Aug 22, 2024 10:48:41 AM
It's gotten worse. The Missouri Supreme Court has blocked the agreement form taking effect...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/missouri-supreme-court-blocks-agreement-that-would-stop-execution-of-death-row-inmate-who-claims-innocence/ar-AA1pfDit?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=DCTS&cvid=a503998b904e4b52a0cc495791e41341&ei=26
Posted by: Respondent | Aug 22, 2024 11:12:32 AM
Honestly, if the state spoiled the evidence, purposely or not, that fact should be held against the state, and a sanction of forfeiting the death penalty should be required at a minimum.
Posted by: Respondent | Aug 22, 2024 12:00:28 PM
Hearing which should have occurred last week is now scheduled to start tomorrow. Since burden is on local prosecutor and inmate to prove actual innocence by clear and convincing evidence under the controlling statute (regardless of what some might want the law to be), that seems to be a high burden in light of what the evidence will show.
Posted by: tmm | Aug 27, 2024 5:56:57 PM
