Continuing with the Panetti story (see previous post), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied a stay 5-4, finding it had no jurisdiction. Jim Malewitz has this story in the Texas Tribune, with links to the opinions.
Panetti's previous competency determination was in 2008. The delay after that point was in litigating Panetti's claim that his "rights" under Indiana v. Edwards had been violated, i.e., that the Texas courts failed to anticipate the Supreme Court's correction of its own error and instead followed the precedents binding on them at the time. (See comment to the previous post.) Of course, Edwards didn't create any rights. It only put a sensible limit on the right created out of whole cloth in Faretta.
So the trial court set an execution date on October 16, 2014, and counsel for Panetti filed their motion nearly a month later, less than 20 days before the execution. Texas has an anti-last-minute statute limiting jurisdiction in the last 20 days. No dice, say the majority.
These kinds of time limit laws can be harsh, but the unscrupulous tactics of the defense side has made them necessary. Filing claims at the last minute that could have been made earlier and then demanding a stay to give the courts time to adjudicate them has long been a key tool in the obstructionist's toolbox. See, e.g., Gomez v. U.S. District Court (Harris), 503 U.S. 653 (1992).
Panetti's previous competency determination was in 2008. The delay after that point was in litigating Panetti's claim that his "rights" under Indiana v. Edwards had been violated, i.e., that the Texas courts failed to anticipate the Supreme Court's correction of its own error and instead followed the precedents binding on them at the time. (See comment to the previous post.) Of course, Edwards didn't create any rights. It only put a sensible limit on the right created out of whole cloth in Faretta.
So the trial court set an execution date on October 16, 2014, and counsel for Panetti filed their motion nearly a month later, less than 20 days before the execution. Texas has an anti-last-minute statute limiting jurisdiction in the last 20 days. No dice, say the majority.
These kinds of time limit laws can be harsh, but the unscrupulous tactics of the defense side has made them necessary. Filing claims at the last minute that could have been made earlier and then demanding a stay to give the courts time to adjudicate them has long been a key tool in the obstructionist's toolbox. See, e.g., Gomez v. U.S. District Court (Harris), 503 U.S. 653 (1992).
Leave a comment