Update for Kerry's appeals process: Her case was fully briefed 2009. We are waiting to be summoned for Oral Arguments, then the court will consider the documents filed and issue a grant or denial for appeal.
This is the direct appeal level for Kerry Lyn's case.
She was convicted March 1995.
Over 18 years later, her case has yet to be heard.
Below are some highlights of the process, remember - Kerry's case is still in stage one of the five level process.
1. The Direct Appeal
The direct appeal is an automatic appeal given to everyone sentenced to death. The appeal is made to the state’s highest court in which someone can seek an appeal from a conviction and death sentence. In some states, this appeal is mandatory but in others, it is optional for the defendant.
The direct appeal is limited to issues from the trial. Typically, the prosecutor and the defense file briefs and oral arguments are held before a panel of judges. After reviewing the case, the judges can affirm the conviction and sentence, reverse the conviction, or reverse the death sentence.
The direct appeal for federal cases is also limited to issues from the trial, but is handled by federal courts, rather than state courts.
Either losing side can then petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, requesting a review of federal constitutional issues.
2. State Post-Conviction
3. Federal Habeas Corpus
4. The U.S. Supreme Court
5. Executive Clemency
the educational material used in this article for the Capital punishment appeals process
was found at :
Understanding some of the issues with Kerry's case:
False Confessions
False confessions contributed to wrongful convictions in 15% of the exonerations examined by researchers at the University of Michigan (Gross, et al., 2005). The most common factors that contribute to defendants admitting to crimes they did not commit are directly related to the confessors’ mental state at the time of their confession. Individuals with mental disabilities may falsely confess to accommodate or appease figures of authority. An impaired mental capacity due to drugs, alcohol or mental illness may also lead to false confessions.
Informant Testimony
According to the Center on Wrongful Convictions, testimony given by co-defendants or other individuals seeking special treatment or the dropping of criminal charges against them is a common factor in wrongful convictions and death sentences. A survey by the Center found that informant testimony played a key role in sending a number of innocent people to death row for crimes they did not commit.
Prosecutorial Discretion at the State Level
State prosecutors have sole discretion whether to pursue the death penalty against a defendant. The financial resources available in a jurisdiction, the views of constituents and the local political climate, and the prosecutor’s own views can affect the likelihood a defendant will face the death penalty. These factors can result in disparities in how often, and for what crimes, the death penalty is sought within a state.
Understanding Jury Instructions
It can be very difficult for ordinary citizens to understand the abstruse legal framework that the courts have constructed around the death penalty. Craig Haney, a prominent psychologist in California, found that even well-educated people misunderstood the instructions to the jury. His research indicated that:
California’s entire penalty instruction is very poorly understood by upper-level college students, that these problems are not clarified in actual cases through attorney arguments, and that jurors who had served in actual capital cases were plagued by fundamental misconceptions about what the instructions meant.
The Issue of Innocence in the Anthony Porter Case
Anthony Porter came within 50 hours of execution and was exonerated from death row nearly 15 years after he was convicted of two counts of murder. There was no physical evidence that linked Porter to the shootings, and he was convicted primarily on the basis of eyewitness accounts that placed Porter in the park at the time of the shooting.
Questions for Further Analysis:
- If Porter had been executed and his case not assigned to a group of students, would the truth ever have been made known?
- How prevalent are abusive police tactics? How can they be controlled? Would video or audio taping all interrogations help?
- Illinois has a moratorium on the death penalty because of innocence cases like Porter’s. Should other states follow suit?
- What is meant by police or prosecutors having “tunnel vision” in pursuing a case? What could cause this? Are capital crimes particularly likely to produce an atmosphere in which law-enforcement personnel develop “tunnel vision”?
