Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Supreme Court upholds Chapman's death sentence
Court Watch | 2007/08/24 04:52
A child killer who asked to be put to death would have his wish granted under a unanimous ruling by the Kentucky Supreme Court on Thursday. Marco Allen Chapman pleaded guilty to brutally attacking a woman and her three children, killing two of the children, in 2002 because she advised his girlfriend to drop him. Chapman, 35, filed an affidavit in May, saying he wants to be put to death.

"My rights are mine, and I am entitled to waive them just as is any other defendant," Chapman wrote.

His lawyers argued that his wish to waive appeals showed he was not competent. But the court ruled Thursday that "our review of the record in this case ... shows that Chapman's plea was competently, knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily made."

The Supreme Court ruling, written by Justice John D. Minton Jr., rejected the argument made by Chapman's defense attorneys that his guilty plea amounted to state-assisted suicide.

"Furthermore, the death penalty is not a disproportionately sentence for Chapman's heinous offenses," Minton wrote. "So Chapman's plea is not an impermissible 'suicide by court.'"

Chief Justice Joseph Lambert said Chapman's "volunteerism" played no part in his decision to uphold the death sentence.

"The wishes of a defendant, whether motivated by sincere remorse, desire to escape life imprisonment or to assert control should play no part in a death penalty determination," Lambert wrote in a concurring opinion.

Chapman admitted to killing 6-year-old Cody Sharon and 7-year-old Chelbi Sharon, and attacking their mother, Carolyn Marksberry, and their sister, Courtney Sharon. Chapman said he deserved to die for the Aug. 23, 2002 attack at Marksberry's home in Gallatin County.

The trial judge, Tony Frohlich, said at the time that he could find no legal reason not to grant Chapman's request.

Despite his request to be put to death, Chapman's court-appointed attorneys, Donna Boyce and Randall Wheeler, appealed the sentence. They argued before the Supreme Court that Frohlich shouldn't have gone along with Chapman's request for a death sentence, saying a defendant who seeks the death penalty is inherently incompetent. For that reason, the attorneys said, Chapman's guilty plea should be set aside and he should be treated for depression before a new plea hearing is held.

Chapman said in the affidavit that sending his case back to the trial court would invalidate his rights, as well as the rights of other inmates who choose to plead guilty.

The Supreme Court, in Thursday's ruling, reaffirmed that the death penalty is constitutional and that neither lethal injection nor electrocution are cruel and unusual punishments.

Despite the ruling, it could be years before an execution date is scheduled, said Allison Connelly, a University of Kentucky law professor. Defense attorneys still could appeal the case to the federal level, even asking the U.S. Supreme Court for review, she said.

Connelly said the state attorney general's office typically won't ask for an execution date until all appeals are exhausted.

The defense lawyers declined to comment, as did the attorney general's office.

Volunteering for a death sentence is not new. Since 1977, when Gary Mark Gilmore waived his appeals and was killed by firing squad in Utah, 124 inmates in 26 of the 38 states with a death penalty law have waived appeals and asked to die, according to the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

A second Kentucky Death Row inmate, Shawn Windsor, is also attempting to expedite his own execution. Windsor pleaded guilty in 2006 to killing his wife and son. He is on Kentucky's Death Row, but Chapman's case is further along in the automatic appeals process granted in death penalty cases.

The Supreme Court on Thursday also upheld the death sentences of Leif Halvorsen and Mitchell Willoughby who were convicted in 1983 of murdering three people in a Lexington apartment, and Fred Furnish who was convicted of murdering a Kenton County woman during a burglary in 1998.



[PREV] [1] ..[6319][6320][6321][6322][6323][6324][6325][6326][6327].. [8300] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Amazon workers strike at mul..
TikTok asks Supreme Court to..
Supreme Court rejects Wiscon..
US inflation ticked up last ..
Court seems reluctant to blo..
Court will hear arguments ov..
Romanian court orders a reco..
Court backs Texas over razor..
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..
PA high court orders countie..
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design