Reason: GA Lawmakers Introduce Bill to End Death Penalty

Georgia Lawmakers Have Introduced a Bill to End the Death Penalty

The bill was introduced by Republicans and co-sponsored by Democrats.

ZURI DAVIS | 4.2.2019 2:35 PM

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL

William Sands/Fracturesphoto/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom

Last week, Georgia state representatives introduced a bill aimed at ending the death penalty.

Three Republicans, Brett Harrell (Snellville), Bill Werkheiser (Glennville), and Scot Turner (Holly Springs), introduced HB207, with three Democrats, Robert Trammell (Luthersville), Scott Holcomb (Atlanta), and William Boddie (East Point), cosponsoring. HB207 seeks to "amend the Official Code of Georgia Annotated so as to repeal the imposition of the death penalty." The proposed bill also seeks to remove any reference to capital punishment from state law as well override any laws in conflict with the new legislation.

The bill reflects a growing trend in the state's criminal justice system. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that prosecutors rarely seek the death penalty in the state as a growing number of juries are rejecting it. A person can only be sentenced to death by a unanimous decision. Anything less will result in a life sentence.

Despite the newer attitudes towards capital punishment, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution notes that Georgia has also produced landmark Supreme Court cases regarding the practice. This includes Gregg v. Georgia, a 1976 decision which held that the death penalty was not an outright violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishments."

Harrell, who is very open about his opposition to the death penalty, retweeted his stance that there was "absolutely nothing conservative about the death penalty."

Hannah Cox, the national manager of the group Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, shared similar beliefs in an interview with Reason. "As conservatives try to live up to their principles, which are limited government, fiscal responsibility, and protecting the sanctity of human life," she says, "this is such an obvious area where we are failing and have failed for many years."

Cox adds that the death penalty does not meet "any of those metrics."

As for the bipartisanship of the bill, Cox says criminal justice reform, including the abolition of the death penalty, is an issue "that brings both sides together."

Capital punishment in Georgia recently sustained a new wave of criticism after the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by inmate Keith Tharpe. Sentenced to death for the murder of his sister-in-law, Jacqueline Freeman, Tharpe and his lawyers allege that now-deceased juror Barney Gattie chose the death penalty for Tharpe because Gattie was racist. To make their case, lawyers submitted a signed affidavit where Gattie used racial slurs and shared his thoughts on "'good' black folks." 

https://reason.com/2019/04/02/ga-death-penalty-bill/

ZURI DAVIS was an assistant editor at Reason.

Disability Rights Groups, Legal Experts, and Conservative Advocates Urge Supreme Court to Strike Down Georgia’s Uniquely Harsh Proof Requirements in Death-Penalty Intellectual Disability Cases

A coalition of disability rights groups, legal experts, and conservative advocates are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down the uniquely harsh burden of proof Georgia has imposed upon defendants seeking to establish their ineligibility for the death penalty because of intellectual disability. 

In four friend-of-the-court briefs filed in late December 2021, two former U.S. solicitors general, eight former prosecutors and judges, seven leading disability rights organizations, scholars, and experts in intellectual disability, and a group of conservative legal reform advocates all urged the Court to declare unconstitutional Georgia’s requirement that capital defendants and death-row prisoners prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that they are intellectually disabled. The filings came in the case of Rodney Young, a Georgia death-row prisoner long classified in school records as “mentally retarded” (the previous name for intellectual disability), who is challenging the requirement.

Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 ruling in Atkins v. Virginia, the execution of someone with intellectual disability violates the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. No other state requires capital defendants to prove intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt, and even Georgia does not impose a comparably high burden in assessing the eligibility of intellectually disabled individuals for social services. Since Georgia adopted the standard in 1988, neither Young nor any other defendant tried for intentional murder has ever been able to satisfy it. 

Young’s lawyers and the friend-of-the-court briefs argue that Georgia’s law violates both the Court’s ruling in Atkinsand his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. Noting that the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard is not imposed on the defendant in any other constitutional rights claim, Young argues that “Georgia is an extreme outlier … not only with respect to Atkins claims, but with respect to all of constitutional law.”

Georgia was the first state to pass a law exempting people with intellectual disability from the death penalty, and the author of the law says the high burden of proof was a drafting error. Jack Martin, one of the legislators responsible for drafting the bill, said in 2013, “I dropped the ball.… It was sloppy draftsmanship, pure and simple.” The bill was not intended to create a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard but, Martin said, a key clause was put in the wrong place. “I don’t think anybody intended that to happen.”

The Amicus (Friend-of-the-Court) Briefs

In their amicus brief, filed on December 23, 2021, Charles Fried, U.S. Solicitor General under President Ronald Reagan, and Seth Waxman, U.S. Solicitor General under President Bill Clinton, wrote that the outcome of Young’s case has important implications for the rule of law. “Invalidating Georgia’s rule would not only eliminate an extreme and unconstitutional outlier but would also reaffirm several principles vital to the rule of law,” they wrote, “including that lower courts are obligated to follow this Court’s precedents irrespective of whether they think those precedents are correct or might be reconsidered and that procedural rules may not subvert substantive protections.” They point out that the consequence of a wrongful execution “is as grave and irreversible as can be,” while the consequence of imposing the available non-capital sentence — usually a sentence of life without parole — on someone who is almost but not quite ineligible to be sentenced to death “is modest.”

A group of eight former judges and prosecutors, in an amicus brief also filed on December 23, emphasized the historical purpose of the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard: “to preserve human life and liberty.” “Georgia’s unprecedented rule jarringly subverts the purposes the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard has served throughout its history,” they continue. “Rather than err on the side of protecting individual life and liberty, the Georgia rule errs on the side of death and virtually guarantees the execution of intellectually disabled individuals. Indeed, in the more than thirty years since the rule was created, not one capital defendant has persuaded a jury of his intellectual disability in a case of intentional murder.”

The individual signers of the brief included former Texas Court of Criminal Judge Elsa Alcala, whose reasoning was adopted by the Supreme Court in Moore v. Texas to strike down scientifically unjustifiable limitations on proof of intellectual disability imposed by Texas; former Florida Supreme Court Justice James E.C. Perry, whose reasoning was adopted by the Supreme Court in Hall v. Florida to strike down Florida’s use of a clinically invalid strict IQ cutoff of 70 to limit the individuals who qualified for a determination of intellectual disability; and former Georgia Supreme Court Justice Norman S. Fletcher, who dissented from the state’s pre-Atkins ruling in Jenkins v. State that initially upheld Georgia’s proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt requirement.

A third amicus brief, filed on December 27, 2021 by a group of disability rights organizations and experts, including the Disability Rights Legal Center and the National Disability Rights Network, described both the risk of jurors relying on unscientific assessments of intellectual disability and the disparity between Georgia’s burden of proof and the treatment of intellectual disability in other aspects of law. On the issue of juror understanding of intellectual disability, the brief explains, that Georgia judges “instruct[ ] jurors that a reasonable doubt ‘is a doubt based upon common sense and reason,’ [which] all but invites jurors to rely on lay perceptions of intellectual disability and lay stereotypes” such as those the Court already struck down in Moore to reject a defendant’s meritorious intellectual disability claim. 

“Georgia allows jurors to find reasonable doubt by relying on one or more stereotypes about intellectual disability or on seemingly inconsistent diagnostic evidence, even though, under accepted clinical standards, such evidence could well support a diagnosis of intellectual disability,” the rights advocates wrote. Their brief also contrasts Georgia’s treatment of intellectual disability in death-penalty cases with its treatment in other situations. “Georgia does not require that intellectual disability be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in areas ranging from providing services for people with intellectual disability to determining limitations periods for medical-malpractice suits,” the experts say. “Only here—when a person’s life is at stake—has Georgia chosen to place ‘almost the entire risk of error’ on the person in need of the law’s protection.”

The fourth brief, filed by the Rutherford Institute, a conservative non-profit legal services organization dedicated to civil liberties and human rights, Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, and Brett Harrell, a former Republican state legislator representing Georgia Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, highlights the government overreach inherent in the Georgia law. Burdens of proof, they write, is one way “our legal system protects individual rights and liberties” and “serve to allocate the risk of error between the parties involved, … reflect[ing] a societal judgement about which party should bear that risk.” In criminal cases, they write, “the government typically bears the risk of error.” 

In a capital case, their brief argues, “a wrongful execution is irreversible.” In such cases, risk of error “cannot be placed on the individual asserting his constitutional right not to be executed.” Without any compelling reason, and alone among the states, they conservative advocates write, “Georgia has departed from this allocation of risk. … This Court should welcome the opportunity to correct Georgia’s deeply consequential overreach.” 

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/disability-rights-groups-legal-experts-and-conservative-advocates-urge-supreme-court-to-strike-down-georgias-uniquely-harsh-proof-requirements-in-death-penalty-intellectual-disability-cases

2014 Session Wrap Up

The 2014 Session of the Georgia General Assembly ended Thursday, March 20 at midnight. Several highlights include:

Bills passed and waiting action by the Governor

Bills not vetoed by the Governor will become law on Tuesday, April 29, 2014.

HB 744 The 2015 Budget at $20.8 billion in state dollars reflects a 4.6% ($916 million) increase over the prior year. K-12 education received 72% ($660 million) of all new revenue; Health and Human Services including Medicaid, PeachCare and Department of Justice received 22% ($203 million) of new revenue. I voted YES.

SB 365 Continues the multi-year Criminal Justice Reform efforts that have resulted in annual savings in excess of $20 million thus far. The bill provides added flexibility for judges regarding non-violent and juvenile offenders. I voted YES.

SR 415 Voters will have the opportunity to cap the state's income tax rate at the current 6% via passage of this Constitutional Amendment authored by Gwinnett Senator David Shafer. I voted YES.

HB 60 Expands Second Amendment rights where law-abiding citizens who have had a background check, fingerprinted, and licensed may carry a firearm. I voted YES.

HB 697 Pays full tuition for the state's highest achieving technical college students. I voted YES.

HB 1080 Authorizes a privately funded monument of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. placed on the grounds of the state Capitol. I voted YES.

Bills failing to pass this Session

HB 885 Allowing the use of cannabis oil to treat certain seizures failed to pass with the addition of an autism health insurance coverage provision. I voted YES.

SB 167 Prohibited testing based on national Common Core standards. Did not reach House floor for a vote.

HB 153 Authorizing fractional SPLOST - sales taxes at varying increments of less than one cent. I voted NO.

Bills I sponsored this Session

HB 412 Electronic property tax billing passed House, added to HB 295 a comprehensive ad valorem tax reform bill in Senate, passed Senate amended, conference committee failed to reach agreement, bill died. I voted YES on both HB 412 and HB 295.

HB 737 Permits home brewers to transport up to one gallon of their creation - passed.  I voted YES.

HB 762 Adds sanitation vehicles and workers to current law improving public safety, passed House, passed Senate committee, died in Senate Rules. I voted YES.

HB 900 Saves state and manufacturing industry money by exempting "consumables" from sales tax - passed. I voted YES.

HB 954 Improves definition of Fair Market Value for residential properties constructed using state housing tax credits - passed. I voted YES.

SB 286 Permitted Georgia wineries to fortify wine within the state rather than having to ship the product out of state - passed. I voted YES.

SB 325 Strengthened Fire Safety Commissioner's ability to regulate fire suppression sprinkler systems - passed. I voted YES.

Obviously, numerous other bills passed and failed this year. Should you have interest in any legislation before the General Assembly and/or my position, please contact me.

Fundraising

Like all candidates and elected representatives, I too require funds to actively communicate with my constituents and mount a campaign for re-election to enable me to continue advocating for our shared values at the state Capitol. Please take a moment to click this link and make an online contribution today - $10 goes further than you may believe and $50 buys 50 campaign signs. I need your support today. 

Legislation Authored or Co-Sponsored

Should you be interested in the legislation that I have authored or co-sponsored and the current status, you may review those bills here.

As always, I remain appreciative that you allow me to serve as your state Representative. I encourage you to contact me with any comments or questions you have about the legislation being considered at the state Capitol.  Now that we are out of session, you can reach me on my cell at 404-966-5804 or via email at brett@voteharrell.com 

 Thank you,

 Brett Harrell  

In the District Please call, email, or write Brett in the District. Representative Brett Harrell P.O. Box 1135 Snellville, GA 30078  404-966-5804 brett@voteharrell.com

More support Harrell for House District 106

Tea Party Organizers endorse Harrell for House

Julianne Thompson, State Coordinator of Tea Party Patriots and Co-Organizer of the Atlanta Tea Party endorses Brett Harrell for State House of Representatives.

“It is my pleasure to endorse Brett Harrell for Georgia State House. Brett is the kind of conservative we need at the Gold Dome in Atlanta. He is a proven leader and will not compromise his values, as he has proven over the years. He will fight for fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets solutions in Georgia. Electing men like Brett Harrell is ethics reform in action. I am proud to endorse him.”

Debbie Dooley, Co-Organizer of the Atlanta Tea Party, also endorses Brett Harrell for Georgia House District 106.

“Brett Harrell is a great guy that understands that elected officials are actually public servants.”

Harrell "certified" Pro-Life by GRTL

I have been answering a number of questionnaires from various organizations interested in the positions of those running for office. I just received a letter in return from Georgia Right to Life stating I have been "certified Pro-Life" for this election. While I sincerely appreciate the "seal of approval" from GRTL, all should know I've held that conviction personally for all of my adult life and most certainly not related to any election.

Brett Harrell answers questions about state House race

Brett Harrell answers questions about state House race
by D. Dixon is an Examiner from Atlanta.

July 27, 3:12 PM

When Georgia State Representative Melvin Everson recently decided to run for the office of Labor Commissioner, Harrell decided he would enter the race for State Representative House seat 106.

Brett Harrell served as Mayor of Snellville from 2000-2003, has been Executive Director of the Evermore Improvement District from September of 2003 to May, 2009. Brett Harrell has also been a small business owner for twenty years.

I asked both Twitter land and Facebook users to send in their questions for Brett Harrell, and the questions and answers are shared below.

@thekencook asks:

Who do you support for Governor?

Originally, Casey Cagle; however, since his departure from the race and my decision to enter the House race, I have not made a decision on which gubernatorial candidate I will personally vote for.

What do you think of Barnes entering the race?

Governor Barnes will energize a segment of the electorate and encourage additional citizens to get involved – that’s positive. His entrance may also shape much of the debate and that may be helpful and instructive as well.

How far will you go for State's Rights?

I believe our Federal government is constitutionally limited and those powers not specifically provided are reserved for the states and/or individuals. I will defend Georgia’s right to self-govern and Georgian’s right to self-determination to the fullest consistent with the U.S. Constitution.

If you were voting on HB1, how would you vote?

I believe life begins at conception and from that point until natural death each person has an unalienable right to life endowed by their Creator as clearly stated in our Declaration. That said, I would vote No on HB1 for numerous reasons including the bill’s inclusion of unnecessary and extraneous material that serves only to incite, fails to advance the cause, and may encourage legal challenge.

Do you understand HR1 (this one is a resolution, not a bill) and do you think it is the right thing for the citizens?

I believe I do and I believe the question goes beyond HR 1 and the freezing of property reassessments. Similar initiatives have been tried in cities, counties and states around the country, and they haven’t worked well. However, I understand the frustration with rising real estate assessments that often fail to accurately reflect true market value. We need comprehensive property tax reform in Georgia. So, instead of focusing on one particular exemption or another or freezing reassessments, we need to overhaul the entire system to make it just and equitable for all our homeowners and businesses.

@DLTMontana asks:

What is your plan to help balance the budget while tax revenues continue to deteriorate?

I support a two-fold approach. First, the zero-based budgeting proposal requires that all State agencies and departments, periodically, justify their existence by developing a budget starting at $0 rather than the prior year’s spending. Over time, zero-based budgeting will limit bloat in worthwhile programs and departments and reveal those programs and departments that have outlived their usefulness to the taxpayers and therefore, should be discontinued. Second, the Legislature also needs to re-examine on a periodic basis the numerous exemptions, allowances, and exclusions provided in the voluminous laws passed each session for opportunities to repeal those provisions no longer positively contributing to our State. The repeals would thereby increase state revenues.

What will you do that is "Pro-small business" in Gwinnett?

Both my parents own small businesses as does my wife and as I did for twenty years. State government’s primary burden on small business is administrative. Frequently the reporting requirements and information is the same furnished to the Departments of Labor, Revenue, Licensing and others. I believe we can streamline reporting, standardize the information and reporting cycles, and relieve small business of a significant burden of compliance and penalties that result from attempting to comply.

Further, the State must recognize that economic development is not simply about attracting new business, but includes opportunities for existing small businesses to grow and prosper. Appropriate incentives providing a measurable return on taxpayer investment should be available to existing small business as well as larger corporate relocations.

Dan Dixon asks:

What do you want to accomplish in the Georgia House of Representatives?

Working with my fellow Legislators, I want to accomplish the following:

Transportation: Finally pass a transportation funding plan that will result in measurable improvements to mobility, congestion mitigation, and access.

Service Delivery: Complete a comprehensive streamlining of state government that includes zero-based budgeting, elimination of numerous entitlements and exemptions, and fairly and efficiently delivers services to our taxpayers at the lowest possible cost.

Education: Preserve our public education system while allowing expansion of charter schools and school choice by empowering parents and local educators to determine the best environment for each individual child.

Taxes: Reform the outdated tax code of Georgia resulting in improved efficiencies and lower taxes on our families and businesses. What worked 50 years ago, may not work today. By reducing the burden of government, we will encourage expansion of private enterprise and additional job creation.

As the campaign moves forward, I will present plans and ideas to accomplish these goals.

What can be done in Georgia about unfunded mandates from the federal government?

Not all federal programs are mandatory; sometimes we just have to say no. By saying yes to every offer, we have too often tied our hands, given up local control, and shackled our local taxpayers with burdens that last years.

In other instances, we must advocate forcefully with our Congressional delegation to pass changes to federal regulations, especially administrative authority within many departments that has grown beyond its’ original intent, to eliminate the burden on state governments imposed by passage of federal legislation. We must also do the same with regard to state mandates passed on to our counties and cities.

What do you think of term limits for the Legislative Branch?

Clearly the Constitution and our Founding Father’s realized the need for term limits within the Executive Branch. I suspect most would have also supported term limits for legislators as well. I certainly support term limits as I implemented limits on both the Office of Mayor and Council in Snellville when in office previously.

How much government is too much on the state level?

Just as the federal government is limited by the U.S. Constitution, our State Constitution establishes the parameters for local government. I believe firmly in free-market principles and individual liberty and responsibility; therefore, I will work to limit the scope of government whenever possible and whenever government attempts to grow beyond its’ Constitutional bounds.

@SnellvilleBlog asks:

What would you consider to be your biggest failure, and how did you come back from it?

My biggest failure in public life was the inability to secure our community’s overwhelming desire regarding billboards and being forced via court order to stand aside as improperly manufactured structures were patched and re-erected. I don’t know that one ever comes back from a tragedy that results in the loss of innocent life, you fight the good fight, you eventually move on, but you never forget or feel a complete sense of recovery.

If someone came to you and expressed a desire to get into political office, what advice would you give?

I would encourage them to pursue their desire. I would encourage them to maintain a sense of vision, excitement, passion, and service and guard against cynicism, detachment, and personal animosity. Holding political office can be a tough job, but immensely gratifying too when you are a part of solving a problem impacting your community.

My campaign slogan is Less Talk, More Action, Brett Harrell Delivers. I have been fortunate to be a part of several significant improvements to our community – Snellville’s new City Hall, Senior Center, and Recycling Center and the soon to be completed U.S. 78 safety project that removed the overhead reversible lane and light system. It is very gratifying to witness hundreds and thousands of citizens benefit from such improvements and if fortunate enough to represent our community at the State Capitol, I intend to continue delivering for all who live or work in District 106.

How can people get involved in your campaign?

I welcome any and all that would like to get involved with the campaign. There are many opportunities:

Join our Facebook supporter page and receive campaign updates and information.www.facebook.com/voteharrell [add a link on your page too]

Encourage your friends, neighbors, and co-workers to do the same.

Volunteer to be a street or neighborhood Captain (assist with signs, literature, phone calls)

Invite me to a neighborhood, church, or business event to visit, listen, or speak.

Support the campaign financially by contributing to: Friends of Brett Harrell, P.O. Box 1135, Snellville, GA 30078 or via a secure online contribution at: http://www.voteharrell.com/

You can reach Brett Harrell at 404-966-5804 or by email: Brett@VoteHarrell.com

Connect with me:

You can follow me on Twitter -You can also find Gwinnett County Headlines Examiner on Facebook Have an interesting story? E-mail me! I can't promise to use everything you send, but I do promise to consider it.
Author: D. Dixon

You can see D.'s articles on D.'s Home Page.

Rudy may accomplish pro-life agenda

I support Rudy Giuliani for President for many reasons. One of which may prove my thinking a bit different. I am pro-life and I believe Rudy Giuliani may have the greatest impact on that issue - though I don't vote for a candidate based on any one issue alone.

The saying, "The Lord works in mysterious ways" may be very true applied to Giuliani. As an example, we have today, arguably, the most pro-life President in our nations' history. Yet, abortion has remained legal and will remain legal every single day of his 8-year Presidency. Ultimately, the decision is not the President's it is the court's.

Giuliani, who is personally opposed would preserve the decision for each woman. He would also appoint, demonstrated by past history, constructionists to the bench. It is believed, again by demonstrated past history, that constructionist judges would more likely end or greatly reduce abortion. My confidence in Giuliani is strengthened by vocal supporters such as Theodore Olsen, former United States Solicitor General, Miguel Estrada, former Assistant Solicitor General, and Co-founder of the Federalist Society Steven Calabresi all who serve on Giuliani's Justice Advisory Committee. Giuliani understands the term "constructionist" and he is less likely to make appointments that turn out later to be disappointments.

Further, the individual decision on abortion may be impacted by a number of factors including education, employment, and availability of services for foster care or adoption. Giuliani's strategy has demonstrated results - reducing abortions by 16% and increasing adoptions by 66% during his term in New York. That's not only real progress, those are lives saved.