Essays academic service


Capital punishment methods and procedures in california

On February 14, 1872, capital punishment was incorporated into the Penal Code, stating: A judgment of death must be executed within the walls or yard of capital punishment methods and procedures in california jail, or some convenient private place in the county. The Sheriff of the county must be present at the execution, and must invite the presence of a physician, the District Attorney of the county, and at least twelve reputable citizens, to be selected by him; and he shall at the request of the defendant, permit such ministers of the gospel, not exceeding two, as the defendant may name, and any persons, relatives or friends, not to exceed five, to be present at the execution, together with such peace officers as he may think expedient, to witness the execution.

But no other persons than those mentioned in this section can be present at the execution, nor can any person under age be allowed to witness the same. The various counties may have some records of the executions conducted under the jurisdiction of the counties, but the department knows of no compilation of these. State Executions Capital punishment on a county level continued until an amendment by the Legislature in 1891 provided: A judgment of death must be executed within the walls of one of the State Prisons designated by the Court by which judgment is rendered.

In this statute, the warden replaced the sheriff as the person who must be present at the execution and invitation to the attorney general, rather than to the district attorney, was required.

  • This wall has firing ports for each member of the firing squad;
  • The noose is then placed snugly around the convict's neck, behind his or her left ear, which will cause the neck to snap.

There apparently was no official rule by which judges ordered men hanged at Folsom rather than San Quentin or vice versa. However, it was customary to send recidivists to Folsom. The first state-conducted execution was held March 3, 1893, at San Quentin.

The first execution at Folsom was December 13, 1895. Lethal Gas On August 27, 1937, the California State Legislature replaced hanging as the method of capital punishment with lethal gas. The law did not affect the execution method for those already sentenced. As a result, the last execution by hanging at Folsom was conducted December 3, 1937.

The last execution by hanging at San Quentin was held May 1, 1942; the defendant had been convicted of murder in 1936.

  • Approximately 20 feet directly in front of the offender is a wall;
  • On June 2, 2015, the State filed a stipulated settlement agreement in the Winchell and Alexander v;
  • Following the offender's last statement, a hood is placed over the offender's head;
  • Treason, train derailing or wrecking, and securing the death of an innocent person through perjury became punishable by death or life imprisonment without parole;
  • The neutralizing process takes approximately 30 minutes from the time the offender's death is determined;
  • Legal Challenges and Changes Beginning in 1967, as a result of various state and United States Supreme Court decisions, there were no executions in California for 25 years.

A total of 215 inmates were hanged at San Quentin and 92 were hanged at Folsom. The gas chamber was installed at San Quentin State Prison in 1938.

State Executions

On December 2, 1938, the first execution by lethal gas was conducted. From that date through 1967, 194 people — including four women — were executed by gas, all at San Quentin.

Legal Challenges and Changes Beginning in 1967, as a result of various state and United States Supreme Court decisions, there were no executions in California for 25 years. In 1973, the United States Supreme Court held that the death penalty was capital punishment methods and procedures in california as it was being administered at that time in a number of states.

In November 1972, the California electorate amended the state constitution and in 1973, legislation was enacted making the death penalty mandatory in specified criminal cases.

Among these were kidnapping if the victim dies, train wrecking if any person dies, assault by a life prisoner if the victim dies within a year, treason against the state, and first-degree murder under specific conditions for hire, of a peace officer, of a witness to prevent testimony, if committed during a robbery or burglary, if committed during the course of a rape by force, if committed during performance of lewd and lascivious acts upon children, by persons previously convicted of murder.

In 1976, the California Supreme Court, basing its decision on a United States Supreme Court ruling earlier that year, held that the California death penalty statute was unconstitutional under the U.

Constitution because it did not allow mitigating circumstances to be admitted as evidence. Following this ruling, 70 inmates had their sentences changed to other than death. Under the new statute, evidence in mitigation was permitted.

The death penalty was reinstated as a possible punishment for first-degree murder under certain conditions. These special circumstances include: In 1977, the Penal Code also was revised to include the sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

At that time, the punishment for kidnapping for ransom, extortion or robbery was changed from death to life without parole. Treason, train derailing or wrecking, and securing the death of an innocent person through perjury became punishable by death or life imprisonment without parole. California voters approved Proposition 7 in November 1978, reaffirming the death penalty in California.

It superseded the 1977 statutes and is the death penalty statute under which California currently operates.

  1. The automatic cycle begins with the programmed 2,300 volts 9. California Voters Retain the Death Penalty Proposition 34, the Death Penalty Initiative Statute, was a ballot measure to repeal the death penalty as the maximum punishment for people found guilty of murder.
  2. Restraints are applied to the offender's arms, legs, chest and head.
  3. On November 6, 2012, 52 percent of California voters voted against it.

Under state law, cases in which the death penalty has been decreed are automatically reviewed by the California Supreme Court which may: Affirm the conviction and the death sentence; Affirm the conviction but reverse the death sentence which results in a retrial of the penalty phase only ; or Reverse the conviction which results in a capital punishment methods and procedures in california new trial.

Even if the California Supreme Court affirms the death sentence, the inmate can initiate appeals on separate constitutional issues. Called Writs of Habeas Corpus, these appeals may be heard in both state and federal courts and can be used to introduce new information or evidence not presented at trial.

Although the death penalty was reinstated in 1978, executions did not resume in California until April 21, 1992, when Robert Alton Harris was put to death in the San Quentin gas chamber. Lethal Injection In January 1993, California law changed to allow condemned inmates to choose either lethal gas or lethal injection as a method of execution. San Quentin State Prison developed lethal injection protocols based on protocols from other jurisdictions Operations Procedure or OP 770.

On August 24, 1993, condemned inmate David Mason was executed after voluntarily waiving his federal appeals. Because Mason did not choose a method of execution, he was put to death by lethal gas, as the law then stipulated. In October 1994, a U. District judge, Northern District San Franciscoruled the use of cyanide gas was cruel and unusual punishment and barred the state from using that method of execution.

The ruling was upheld by the U. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in February 1996. That same year, the California Penal Code was modified to state that if either manner of execution is held invalid, the punishment of death shall be imposed by the alternative means.

California's One-Drug Execution Method Rejected

The law further stipulated that lethal injection become the "default" method of execution should an inmate fail to choose. Serial killer William Bonin was executed on February 23, 1996, by lethal injection, the first California execution using that method.

Morales is on death row for the kidnap, rape and murder of Terri Winchell. On December 15, 2006, the U. The specific deficiencies identified were: Inconsistent and unreliable screening of execution team members; A lack of meaningful training, supervision, and oversight of the execution team; Inconsistent and unreliable record keeping; Improper mixing, preparation, and administration of sodium thiopental by the execution team; and Inadequate lighting, overcrowded conditions, and poorly designed facilities in which the execution team must work.

The governor immediately directed the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation CDCR to undertake a thorough review of all aspects of its lethal injection protocols. CDCR informed the court it would undertake a thorough review and submit to the Court by May 15, 2007, a revised process. CDCR assembled a team to conduct its review. In addition to reviewing and revising OP 770 and focusing on the deficiencies identified by the court, CDCR sought to identify other improvements to the lethal injection protocol.

The team consulted with experts and visited other jurisdictions. On May 15, 2007, CDCR released a report to the court proposing revisions to the capital punishment methods and procedures in california injection protocol. Established a screening process for selection of execution team members and a periodic review process for team members. Established a comprehensive training program for all execution team members including supervision and oversight.

The training regimen focused on custody and care of the condemned inmate, the infusion process, intravenous application and vein access, characteristics and effects of each chemical used in the process, proper preparation and mixing of chemicals, the security of the lethal injection facility, proper record keeping and other areas. Developed standardized record-keeping to ensure there are complete and reliable records of each execution.

The state developed specific forms, processes and formats to ensure completeness, accuracy and consistency and provided specialized training. Developed training processes for the proper use of sodium thiopental. Training processes were developed for proper mixing, preparation and administration of sodium thiopental. Recommended improvements to the lethal injection facility at San Quentin State Prison, including steps to ensure adequate equipment, lighting and space.

Current law requires that all executions be conducted within the walls of San Quentin State Prison. In 2007, construction of a lethal injection facility began to address the U. Proposed revisions to the lethal injection protocol OP 770including modifying the procedures used to administer the lethal injection. A one-drug protocol and a three-drug protocol were both considered. The revised protocol was created to ensure the procedure did not create an undue and unnecessary risk that an inmate would suffer extreme pain.

A lethal injection protocol had been in effect since 1993. No court had required it to be promulgated as a regulation. The public comment period began on May 1, 2009. In January 2010 CDCR issued a notice of modification to the text of the proposed lethal injection regulations.

  • Prison officials drafted procedures to use one of two possible drugs, to be obtained from private pharmacies;
  • The most common problems encountered include burning of varying degrees to parts of the body, and a failure of the procedures to cause death without repeated shocks;
  • He said the U;
  • Under state law, cases in which the death penalty has been decreed are automatically reviewed by the California Supreme Court which may;
  • Constitution because it did not allow mitigating circumstances to be admitted as evidence.

The changes in the re-notice were in response to comments received regarding the originally proposed regulation text. On June 11, CDCR published a second re-notice to the public addressing the issues raised by the OAL, and after accepting and responding to public comments, re-submitted its regulations on July 6, 2010. The rulemaking record was filed with the Secretary of State the same day to take effect with the force of law in 30 days. August 29, 2010, was the permanent effective date of the regulations.

The execution of condemned inmate Albert Greenwood Brown, Jr. It was rescheduled to September 30 after the governor issued a temporary reprieve to allow inmate Brown to exhaust all appeals under the law and to allow the California Supreme Court time to review lower court decisions in the various legal challenges surrounding the scheduled execution. Although the State capital punishment methods and procedures in california in the Court of Appeal, it could not carry out the execution until the California Supreme Court proceedings were final.

The California Supreme Court indicated that more time was needed to review legal challenges by the involved parties. The court issued an injunction prohibiting CDCR from executing anyone until such time as new lethal injection regulations were promulgated in compliance with the APA.

The court permanently enjoined CDCR from carrying out the execution of any condemned inmate by lethal injection unless and until new regulations are promulgated in compliance with the Capital punishment methods and procedures in california. California Voters Retain the Death Penalty Proposition 34, the Death Penalty Initiative Statute, was a ballot measure to repeal the death penalty as the maximum punishment for people found guilty of murder.

On November 6, 2012, 52 percent of California voters voted against it. District Judge Cormac J. Such an outcome is antithetical to any civilized notion of just punishment. Cate on behalf of Bradley Winchell. It asserted excessive delay in carrying out the judgment of death and asked the court to order CDCR to promulgate a single-drug lethal injection protocol for the execution of inmate Michael Morales, on death row for the kidnap, rape and murder of Terri Winchell.

On November 7, 2014, Bradley Winchell and Kermit Alexander, whose mother, sister and two nephews were murdered by condemned inmate Tiequon A. Winchell and Alexander v. Beard asserted that CDCR had abused its discretion, failed its duty and violated their rights because of unnecessary delays. CDCR filed its response to the petition in December 2014 and stated that Winchell and Alexander lacked legal standing and that the Legislature had given CDCR discretion over how and when to develop lethal injection regulations.

The judge allowed a hearing later that month and affirmed her tentative ruling on February 6, 2015.