RALEIGH, N.C. -- The North Carolina Supreme Court this week heard oral arguments in the cases of Cory Bennett of Sampson County and Cedric Hobbs of Cumberland County. Attorneys for the two men argued that prosecutors excluded black citizens from the defendants' juries because of their race.
David Weiss, senior staff attorney for the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, said if the court finds that racial discrimination played a key role in removing jurors, the men may receive new trials.
"So, if the court finds that there was race discrimination against black jurors or jurors of color in these two cases," he said, "it would be the first time in the history of our state that our court has recognized the problem of race discrimination in jury selection."
Weiss said the court should reach a decision in coming months. A 2018 analysis found that North Carolina's high courts largely have failed to enforce a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision that barred racially motivated jury exclusion.
In the more than 30 years since the 1986 law, Weiss said, more than 100 North Carolina defendants have raised claims of discrimination against jurors of color.
"There are multiple studies in our state, which have looked at hundreds of cases -- have looked at decisions to remove thousands of jurors -- and have found that black jurors are removed by prosecutors at twice the rate that white jurors and all other jurors are removed," he said.
Durham County District Attorney Satana Deberry said this is a problem that everyone in the justice system, including prosecutors, needs to address.
"Doing trainings around our own racial bias, around the ways in which racial bias may impact the decisions that we make in picking jurors," she said, "and that just even having vocalized that to our attorneys, and having them keep on the top of their mind, I think has made a difference."
Other states including Connecticut, Nevada and Washington have taken recent steps to address racial discrimination in the jury box, including reversing convictions marred by racial bias, crafting new legal approaches and appointing commissions to study jury discrimination.
Legal documents for the two cases are online at google.com, and the 2018 analysis is at nacdl.org.
Disclosure: Center for Death Penalty Litigation contributes to our fund for reporting. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A package to improve public safety is moving ahead in the California state Legislature - with a floor vote in the State Assembly on the first bill expected this week.
Assembly Bill 2215 puts into statute that police officers have the discretion to send people arrested for low-level offenses directly to supportive services.
Anthony DiMartino - government affairs director with the nonprofit Californians for Safety and Justice - said sometimes public safety is best served when people avoid arrest and instead get therapy, addiction support or help getting a job.
"We're also hoping to raise awareness that this is something officers can do, and then also encourage partnerships more with officers to look at what's in their community," said DiMartino, "as alternatives to jail booking."
A second bill would increase transparency and accountability on money sent to the counties as part of the Public Safety Realignment.
A third bill would require police officers, prosecuting attorneys and investigators to identify themselves any time they're interviewing a family member of someone killed or severely injured by police.
DiMartino said they also support AB 2499, which would ensure that survivors of violent crime and their family members can take unpaid time off work to address safety concerns and heal.
"We're hoping to broaden the scope a bit," said DiMartino, "and make it more clear that family members of victims are able to also tap into unpaid leave to support their family member that has been a victim."
A fifth bill would make it easier for justice-involved people and crime victims to speak freely during restorative justice programs - by making the communications inadmissible in other legal proceedings.
Disclosure: Californians for Safety and Justice contributes to our fund for reporting on Criminal Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Missouri went through with its first execution of the year, as Brian Dorsey was put to death last night, just after 6 p.m. CT.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to stop Dorsey's execution. He was convicted of murdering his cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband Ben nearly 20 years ago.
The advocacy group Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty launched several recent campaigns on Dorsey's behalf to spare his life.
Jenni Gerhauser, a cousin to both Dorsey and Sarah Bonnie, expressed belief in his redemption.
"Brian is more than the worst moment of his life," Gerhauser stressed. "There is so much more to him."
Gerhauser fondly remembered him as fun and charming from their visits during holidays. Dorsey's current lawyers said he was in a drug-induced psychosis when he killed the Bonnies in 2006 and his attorneys at the time had been offered money, preventing them from fighting the death penalty with his guilty plea deal.
Gov. Mike Parson confirmed Monday the state would move forward with Dorsey's death sentence, rejecting a separate request for clemency. More than 70 current and former corrections officers had urged the governor to commute Dorsey's sentence, arguing he had been rehabilitated.
Claudia Boyce, also a cousin in the family, said it should not be a decision for the state to make.
"You know, that's supposed to be God's decision, not ours," Boyce contended.
Dorsey received a lethal injection Tuesday evening. Lethal injection became an option for people on Missouri's death row in 1987, alongside lethal gas.
get more stories like this via email
Amid overcrowding and unsafe conditions in West Virginia jails, state lawmakers introduced bills that would allow judges to take a 'second look' at an individual's original sentence.
If a court determines they no longer pose a threat to the community, the person could be released, placed on supervision, or receive a shortened sentence.
Sara Whitaker - criminal legal policy analyst with the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy - said West Virginia is one of the few states that has seen its prison population balloon over the past decade, despite declining crime.
She noted that as of last month, more than 500 people in the state were in jail awaiting transfer to a prison.
"As a result, eight out of 10 of the regional jails in the state were beyond capacity," said Whitaker, "with hundreds of people assigned to sleeping on the floor."
The bills failed to advance this session, but Whitaker said advocates are hopeful lawmakers will consider them next year.
The state's jails remain among the deadliest in the country, with at least 91 people losing their lives while incarcerated in the past few years.
According to the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, jail bills cost counties $45 million in 2022.
Nationwide, long sentences have led to growth in the number of older people behind bars.
Whitaker pointed out that 'Second Look' legislation could help the state avoid turning its prisons into nursing homes, and said the number of elderly people in prison has tripled in the past two decades.
"In 2019, West Virginia had to open a dementia unit in one of its prisons," said Whitaker. "There are hospice units across multiple prisons. And experts predict that this is just only going to get worse."
Whitaker added that 'Second Look' policies also offer a way to correct past racial injustice in the criminal legal system.
Black people incarcerated in West Virginia are four times more likely than white people to be serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole, and five times as likely to be serving a life-without-parole sentence.
get more stories like this via email