Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas joined Scalia in dissenting.
According to a report by The Associated Press, the three dissenting justices, the court's most conservative members, telegraphed their views when they complained about reprieves the court majority had granted to two Texas inmates who claim they are retarded.
The most immediate effect of the ruling will be in the 20 states that allowed execution of the retarded up to now. Presumably, dozens or perhaps hundreds of inmates in those states will now argue that they are retarded, and that their sentences should be converted to life in prison.
The state also argues that the "new evidence" -- the doctors' statements -- is not credible. These doctors met with Hill and reviewed extensive documentation in 2000, and they haven't seen him since and didn't have new information, the state argues. The judge agreed, writing that the new petition is procedurally barred and that the "new evidence" does not establish a miscarriage of justice.
This is an example of the level of technicalities being invoked by the State of Texas.
So unless the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear a further appeal of this legal nightmare -- if the defendant decides to mount one -- Texas will have its way with Warren Hill.
And this will accomplish what?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
