In a 1st test for court watchers, Sotomayor upholds death sentence




The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the death penalty for an Alabama
inmate whose attorney declined to present evidence about the man's mental
deficiencies to a jury deciding his fate.

The 7 to 2 ruling was notable because it was written by Justice Sonia
Sotomayor, her first full opinion on capital punishment since she joined
the court. She said that while the wisdom of the lawyer's decision might
be "debatable," it was not unreasonable to think he had made a strategic
decision that kept out more damaging evidence about his client.

The ruling came as the court indicated that a long-awaited decision in
another case might be at hand. The justices took the unusual step of
adding a session Thursday to issue opinions, prompting speculation that it
might be ready to announce its much-anticipated ruling about the role of
corporate spending in election campaigns.

The court never says in advance what it will announce, but the political
world has been awaiting the court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal
Election Commission. The case, first argued last spring, was reargued in
September to consider whether it is unconstitutional for Congress to
forbid corporations and labor unions to use their treasuries to bankroll
ads for and against candidates.

Those who advocate greater government control over campaign contributions
say a court decision in the affirmative would revolutionize the way
political campaigns are funded. Corporations and labor unions now are
required to fund their political activities through money raised by their
political action committees.

The death penalty case came in a challenge from Holly Wood, who killed his
former girlfriend Ruby Lois Gosha with a shotgun while she was sleeping in
her Troy, Ala., home in 1993.

Wood challenged his death sentence on several grounds, including the
decision by his inexperienced attorney not to pursue and introduce to the
jury a psychologist's report about Wood's diminished mental capacity. Such
evidence could be seen as mitigating when considering whether Wood
deserved death for his actions.

The Alabama Supreme Court upheld Wood's sentence, but a federal judge
agreed with Wood that the lawyer's performance was incompetent. The U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed that decision.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the appeals court was right. "Even if
it is debatable, it is not unreasonable to conclude that . . . counsel
made a strategic decision not to inquire further into the information
contained in the report about Wood's mental deficiencies and not to
present to the jury such information," Sotomayor wrote.

She noted that the report contained information about Wood trying to kill
another ex-girlfriend in much the same manner.

She was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin
Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and
Stephen G. Breyer.

Justices John Paul Stevens and Anthony M. Kennedy dissented, saying the
lawyer's decision was best attributed to "inattention and neglect."

Sotomayor's extensive record as a judge is scant on capital punishment.
The pro-death-penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation said it was
encouraged by Sotomayor's decision to uphold the appeals court ruling.

The case is Wood v. Allen.

(source: Washington Post)




NOTE----this now means that all 9 of the current justices of the US
Supreme Court have voted in favor to support the ideology and practice of
state killing