High court tosses ruling favorable to Abu-Jamal
Posted at 09:19 AM on Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2010
By MARYCLAIRE DALE - Associated Press Writer
http://www.fresnobee.com/641/story/1787468.html
PHILADELPHIA -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out a ruling that had set aside the death sentence of Mumia Abu-Jamal, convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in a racially tinged case that has made the former Black Panther an international cause celebre.
The justices ordered the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to revisit its 2008 ruling that Abu-Jamal deserved a new sentencing hearing because of flawed jury instructions at his 1982 trial. The Supreme Court pointed to its ruling in an Ohio case last week, when it said a neo-Nazi killer did not deserve a new sentencing hearing on those grounds.
Prosecutors called the Ohio case directly on point.
"The order pretty much says it all," Philadelphia Assistant District Attorney Hugh J. Burns Jr. said. "I don't see how you can possibly distinguish them."
But Abu-Jamal's lawyer insists the facts differ.
"If our cases are similar, of course it doesn't bode well. But they're different," said lead appellate lawyer Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco. "It's always uphill with a death-penalty case."
The 3rd Circuit could still order a federal trial court to consider Abu-Jamal's case anew on other still-pending defense claims.
A mostly white Philadelphia jury convicted Abu-Jamal of killing white Officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981 after the patrolman pulled over Abu-Jamal's brother in an overnight traffic stop.
Prosecutors believe the 25-year-old Faulkner managed to shoot Abu-Jamal during the confrontation. A wounded Abu-Jamal, his own gun lying nearby, was still at the scene when police arrived, and authorities consider the evidence against him overwhelming.
Since Abu-Jamal's conviction, activists in the United States and Europe have rallied in support of his claims that he was the victim of a racist justice system. Abu-Jamal has kept his case in the spotlight through books and radio broadcasts.
"His body's locked up, but his mind is free as a bird," Bryan told The Associated Press. "He has a lot to draw from within that most people similarly situated don't have."
Faulkner's widow, Maureen, did not immediately return phone messages Tuesday.
Abu-Jamal, a former radio reporter born Wesley Cook, has been on Pennsylvania's death row for about 28 years. Hundreds of supporters gathered outside the federal courthouse in Philadelphia when his latest appeal was argued in May 2007.
Bryan unsuccessfully argued for a new trial on grounds the prosecution improperly excluded blacks from the jury, made up of 10 whites and two blacks.
In March 2008, the 3rd U.S. Circuit upheld the first-degree murder conviction but found the jury instructions and verdict form flawed and agreed Abu-Jamal deserved a new sentencing hearing. The Supreme Court rejected Abu-Jamal's appeal of his conviction.
The issue over the instructions relates to whether jurors understood how to weigh mitigating circumstances that might have kept Abu-Jamal off death row. Under the law, jurors did not have to agree unanimously on a mitigating circumstance.
"The verdict form together with the jury instructions were misleading as to whether unanimity was required in consideration of mitigating circumstances," the appeals court wrote.
But last week, the Supreme Court reversed a similar ruling from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. That case dealt with Frank Spisak, the neo-Nazi who killed three people in 1982.
Abu-Jamal's oldest brother argued Tuesday that new evidence that has surfaced over the years should be aired at a retrial.
"I don't think it should ever be too late to hear information that can save someone," said Keith Cook, 66, of Hillsborough, N.C.
More info @news.google: http://news.google.de/news/story?um=1&cf=all&ned=de&hl=en&cf=all&ncl=dj…
*********
U.S. court sends back Abu-Jamal death penalty case
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday granted an appeal by prosecutors and set aside a ruling that invalidated the death sentence of black political activist Mumia Abu-Jamal for the 1981 murder of a Philadelphia police officer.
His case has become a prominent cause for many death penalty opponents.
In a brief order, the Supreme Court sent the case back to a U.S. appeals court based in Philadelphia for further consideration in view of the high court's recent decision in an Ohio case that had raised similar issues.
The Supreme Court in the Ohio case unanimously reinstated the death sentence of a neo-Nazi convicted of murdering three men. The court's action, which was not a ruling on the merits of the case, could lead to Abu-Jamal's death sentence being reinstated, too.
The appeals court had ruled that Abu-Jamal, 55, deserved a new sentencing hearing because of flawed jury instructions.
Abu-Jamal, a former member of the Black Panthers militant group, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1982 for murdering white Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in an early morning confrontation on December 9, 1981.
The officer was shot after stopping Abu-Jamal's brother for driving the wrong way down a Philadelphia street. Abu-Jamal, a former radio reporter who was arrested at the scene, has maintained his innocence.
Abu-Jamal's jailhouse writings about the justice system have drawn the attention of many people around the world. His case attracted the support of many death penalty opponents, foreign political leaders and Hollywood celebrities.
The flaw in the jury instructions related to whether the jurors understood how to weigh mitigating circumstances that could have resulted in a sentence other than the death penalty. Under the law, jurors did not have to agree unanimously on the mitigating circumstances.
Prosecutors appealed to the Supreme Court the part of the appeals court decision that invalidated Abu-Jamal's death sentence. The Supreme Court last year let stand the part of the decision that upheld Abu-Jamal's murder conviction.
(Editing by Will Dunham)