Dying Penalty Circumstances in Maricopa County Hardly ever Finish in a Dying Sentence

In 2010, Vikki Valencia’s 24-year-old brother, Triny Rey Lozano, died in an virtually unimaginably brutal approach. He was shot within the head a number of occasions, dumped on a distant highway exterior Phoenix and set on hearth.

Valencia noticed just one approach prosecutors may deliver her household justice: The killer ought to get the loss of life penalty.

Maricopa County prosecutors constructed a capital homicide case towards the person they are saying killed Lozano, Victor Hernandez.

Valencia knew it will take a very long time however believed it will be price it. Over almost 10 years, she visited the courthouse lots of of occasions, regularly lacking work to attend hearings the place she revisited traumatic photos of the crime scene.

“The loss of life penalty was the factor that we needed most as a result of we thought it was going to present us justice,” she stated in a latest interview.

Throughout jury choice, the case stalled due to a possible battle of curiosity involving a prosecutor who had beforehand represented Hernandez. Years later, a second trial adopted. As that jury was deliberating, prosecutors dropped the loss of life penalty. 9 years after he was charged with killing Lozano, Hernandez was discovered responsible and sentenced to life in jail.

Though the Maricopa County Lawyer’s Workplace has traditionally pursued the loss of life penalty at excessive charges, its efforts hardly ever end in a loss of life sentence.

ProPublica and ABC15 Arizona reviewed almost 350 circumstances over a 20-year interval wherein Maricopa County prosecutors determined the crimes warranted the loss of life penalty, and located that 13% led to a loss of life sentence. In a lot of the circumstances, defendants both pleaded responsible and obtained a lesser sentence or prosecutors modified course, ending their pursuit of the loss of life penalty.

In 76 trials wherein Maricopa County juries deliberated a loss of life sentence, 41, or 54%, yielded one.

By comparability, an evaluation of loss of life penalty circumstances initiated in Harris County, Texas, from 2004 by means of 2023, discovered prosecutors took fewer circumstances, 24, to trial and had been extra profitable, acquiring a loss of life sentence 75% of the time, in keeping with figures supplied by an area advocacy group. Knowledge over an extended time interval additionally exhibits that federal prosecutors nationwide have obtained loss of life sentences at a better price than in Maricopa County, in keeping with the Federal Dying Penalty Useful resource Counsel Mission.

Pursuing the loss of life penalty is among the many most consequential choices that prosecutors make. Every case might be litigated throughout the tenures of a number of county attorneys and may value greater than one million {dollars}. Within the lots of of Maricopa County loss of life penalty circumstances that prosecutors have pursued since 2007, the price of furnishing the accused with an ample protection has totaled $289 million. However the outcomes within the county increase questions concerning the workplace’s judgment in its pursuit of the last word punishment, in keeping with courtroom information and interviews with greater than three dozen folks together with attorneys, former prosecutors, members of the family of victims and defendants, jurors and consultants.

Former County Lawyer Rick Romley stated there must be a evaluation of capital charging choices after ProPublica and ABC15 shared the newsrooms’ findings with him. Romley questioned whether or not prosecutors are searching for loss of life “within the acceptable circumstances.”

“The jury is sort of a barometer of whether or not or not you’re doing a very good job,” he stated. “And fairly frankly … if it was a faculty grade, that’s known as an F.”

The workplace, now headed by Rachel Mitchell, a Republican, declined our request for an interview. A spokesperson responded to written questions, emphasizing that “just one” individual in Maricopa County — Mitchell — makes the choice to hunt the loss of life penalty and that every case is reviewed all through the method, as info adjustments.

Maricopa County’s and the state of Arizona’s dealing with of the loss of life penalty have been questioned for years. A 2016 report by the now-defunct Truthful Punishment Mission, a authorized and academic analysis group at Harvard College, cited the county, amongst different locations, as having a historical past of “overzealous prosecutors, insufficient protection and a sample of racial bias and exclusion.”

As well as, protection attorneys for a loss of life row prisoner in 2018 petitioned unsuccessfully to the U.S. Supreme Courtroom, claiming that Arizona’s statute was overly broad as a result of virtually each homicide might be charged as a capital case. And two former prosecutors and appeals courtroom judges wrote in a 2022 legislation journal article that state officers, slightly than particular person counties, ought to make all loss of life penalty choices to make sure the method is “much less arbitrary.”

Maricopa County prosecutors’ dealing with of loss of life penalty circumstances is newly related as Arizona has resumed executions after a two-year pause. The state, which has 111 folks on loss of life row, halted executions in 2014, after Joseph Wooden was injected repeatedly over two hours, gasping greater than 600 occasions earlier than dying, in keeping with a reporter’s account. The state executed three folks in 2022 however paused after the newly elected Gov. Katie Hobbs ordered a evaluation of the deadly injection course of. Hobbs dismissed the retired federal Justice of the Peace she had appointed to conduct the evaluation after he concluded there is no such thing as a humane option to execute folks.

Valencia and her household felt the case had put their lives on maintain. Wanting again, she stated it appeared odd that the prosecution, which had pursued loss of life for thus lengthy, determined to not as soon as the result was shut. (Prosecutors declined to touch upon the case.)

However as Valencia realized, there’s little transparency across the course of in Maricopa County. Though the ultimate determination to hunt loss of life is made by the county lawyer, every case is vetted by slightly recognized panel, the Capital Overview Committee. The county lawyer’s workplace refused to confide in ProPublica and ABC15 who sits on the panel, how they vote on the circumstances being thought-about for the loss of life penalty and even which circumstances they evaluation.

The workplace stated in an announcement that the method ends not with the county lawyer’s workplace however with a trial, which is “all finished in public, in an open courtroom.” The workplace additionally stated that it’s profitable in prosecuting capital circumstances and comparisons to Harris County might be deceptive as a result of they ignore the “particulars and intricacies of particular person circumstances.”

Establishing a committee is usually higher than particular person judgments, however the high quality of the choices is dependent upon the people concerned, stated Robert Dunham, former director of the Dying Penalty Data Heart, a bunch that shares knowledge and evaluation on capital punishment and regularly highlights points with the system.

“Anybody who says that they’ve a good course of and is unwilling to say what that course of is, is someone who doesn’t have a good course of,” Dunham stated.

“I Must Run It by The Man”

When Romley, a Republican, was first elected Maricopa County lawyer in 1989, deputy prosecutors in one of many nation’s largest counties determined whether or not to hunt the loss of life penalty on their very own.

Among the many first adjustments Romley made was to foster extra deliberation. He created the Capital Overview Committee to judge circumstances and advocate whether or not to pursue the loss of life penalty. He nonetheless had the ultimate say, however he believed {that a} group of veteran prosecutors would apply the legislation extra persistently and advocate solely circumstances that warranted the last word punishment.

“Looking for the loss of life penalty is a momentous determination that you just’ve acquired to make,” Romley stated. “I needed to guarantee that we had been ferreting out all of the info, that we made certain that judgment wasn’t being skewed by private biases.”

Romley served 4 phrases and determined to not search a fifth, leaving workplace in 2004. His successor was Andrew Thomas, a Republican lawyer and writer, who ran as a law-and-order conservative vowing to crack down on unlawful immigration and impose more durable sentences. After two years, Thomas had almost doubled the variety of loss of life penalty prosecutions, incomes Maricopa County the excellence of searching for loss of life greater than virtually every other jurisdiction within the nation.

Critics stated Thomas sought the loss of life penalty for crimes that didn’t warrant it — together with a case of vehicular murder. The defendant in that case, David Szymanski, had a blood-alcohol content material almost twice the authorized restrict and cocaine in his system when he drove the fallacious approach on a freeway and killed a 22-year-old man.

A police evaluation discovered that officers had violated division coverage whereas pursuing Szymanski. Thomas relented greater than a yr later, and the Capital Overview Committee advisable the capital cost be withdrawn. Szymanski pleaded responsible to second-degree homicide and was sentenced to 22 years in jail.

The sufferer’s mom advised the Arizona Republic, “We’ve by no means needed the loss of life penalty.”

Kenneth Everett, who was a protection lawyer on capital circumstances for the Maricopa County Workplace of the Authorized Advocate throughout Thomas’ tenure, advised the American Bar Affiliation’s ABA Journal in 2010 that it was clear choices on the circumstances had been made solely by Thomas. “Once I begged for a deal, all the prosecutors would say, ‘I’ve to run it by the person,’” he stated. “Thomas definitely had the last word energy. And if he stated no, you had been going to trial. And he often stated no.”

The Arizona Supreme Courtroom convened a process drive to handle case delays amid a scarcity of certified capital protection attorneys.

Thomas responded to criticism of the delays by blaming protection attorneys for drawing out proceedings and the courts for failing to implement speedy trial guidelines. He wrote in an Arizona Republic opinion piece, “I’ve sought the loss of life penalty in acceptable circumstances understanding juries make the last word determination and believing they need to have this selection.”

Thomas gained a second time period however resigned in 2010 to pursue an unsuccessful bid for state lawyer common. He was later disbarred for misconduct and political prosecutions of county officers. Thomas, who didn’t reply to requests for remark, stated on the time that he was “working to combat corruption.”

After Thomas’ resignation, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors appointed Romley to serve out the time period. Again in his outdated job, Romley reviewed the 120 capital circumstances the workplace was pursuing on the time. He determined to not search the loss of life penalty in 11 of them, together with a case wherein a 4-month-old baby was discovered lifeless at an in-home day care. The health worker had concluded the kid died of blunt drive trauma, however Romley stated he introduced in medical consultants who disputed that and located the accidents the kid suffered may have been attributable to an sickness.

In courtroom minutes of a listening to to drop the loss of life penalty within the case, the Capital Overview Committee is famous as having voted 8-0 to dismiss the case, which was by no means refiled. However the weight of the cost on the defendant, Lisa Randall, is clear in courtroom paperwork. Over the three years she was out and in of jail, her marriage fell aside and he or she misplaced her home, in keeping with courtroom paperwork. Randall couldn’t be reached for remark.

“When you allege loss of life, the entire recreation adjustments,” Romley stated. “So many extra sources go into that exact case.”

“They Ought to Present Among the Bravery That They Count on Us to Present”

As soon as a prosecutor decides to hunt the loss of life penalty, the stakes rise. The courts and victims’ households face a lengthier course of, and jurors can face intense scrutiny.

The courtroom appoints two protection attorneys, together with an investigator and a mitigation specialist. (In different circumstances, defendants have just one lawyer.) The protection can be given extra time to organize, to permit for an examination of the defendant’s background to search out sympathetic elements that might mitigate a loss of life sentence.

Capital trials eat extra time as a result of they include three components: A jury first decides if the defendant is responsible; then jurors take into account aggravating circumstances that might make the defendant eligible or ineligible for a loss of life sentence. Lastly, the jury decides if the sentence must be loss of life or life in jail.

It’s unclear how a lot the Maricopa County Lawyer’s Workplace spends prosecuting capital circumstances. When ProPublica and ABC15 requested the workplace for a breakdown, a spokesperson stated that the workplace doesn’t monitor spending on loss of life penalty circumstances.

However since 2007, the county has spent almost $289 million on protection for capital circumstances. Final yr, the county spent $26 million, greater than any yr since 2007, in keeping with the Maricopa County Workplace of Public Protection Companies.

In Oklahoma, a examine launched in 2017 discovered that capital circumstances value, on common, 3 times greater than noncapital circumstances.

Jodi Arias made headlines in 2013 when she was convicted of killing her ex-boyfriend. Prosecutors sought the loss of life penalty twice, and jurors deadlocked each occasions. Arias was finally sentenced to life in jail. The 2 trials value $3.2 million, together with the protection and prosecution, in keeping with officers on the time.

Throughout the 20 years examined by ProPublica and ABC15, juries in 35 circumstances both voted for all times, deadlocked, decided the circumstances didn’t qualify for loss of life or discovered the defendant not responsible. In 41 circumstances, jurors advisable the loss of life penalty.

Frank Baumgartner, a College of North Carolina political science professor, was shocked Maricopa County juries disagreed with prosecutors 46% of the time in capital circumstances. Prosecutors would save taxpayers cash by exercising extra discretion over which circumstances they pursue, Baumgartner stated. In addition they seem like out of step with public opinion within the county, on condition that juries disagree with them so regularly on the loss of life penalty. “They’re not in sync with their local people,” he stated.

Individuals who served on capital juries within the county advised ProPublica and ABC15 that they’d traumatic experiences. Throughout the choice course of, potential jurors are requested private questions in open courtroom, making them really feel weak. Some have had their identities revealed by jurors who disagree with them.

A juror in a high-profile Maricopa County homicide case who requested to not be named due to security considerations known as the expertise “one of many worst of my life.” As soon as the juror realized it was a loss of life penalty case, the stress triggered intense abdomen ache. “It’s the very best penalty within the land, and I don’t assume that it must be utilized evenly,” the previous juror stated.

Given what jurors undergo, prosecutors must be clear about their decision-making, the juror stated.

“They need to present among the bravery that they count on us to point out,” the previous juror stated of the secretive committee. “You ask us to do that, to place our life on maintain, to undergo this, not share it with anyone. Then present among the bravery that you just maintain us to, and be accountable like we’d be accountable if we had been caught not following any of the principles.”

In 2019, Myla Fairchild served as a juror in a case towards the person accused of murdering Gilbert police Lt. Eric Shuhandler, who was killed after pulling over a pickup truck. Christopher Redondo, a passenger within the truck, shot Shuhandler within the face, setting off a 50-mile chase, prosecutors stated. Fairchild stated she voted towards the loss of life penalty due to Redondo’s psychological capability and lengthy historical past of psychological sickness. Redondo was convicted of homicide and sentenced to life in jail. Afterwards, pissed off jurors advised the media Fairchild’s title.

She wasn’t afforded the identical privateness because the prosecutors on the evaluation committee who advisable the loss of life penalty within the first place, she stated.

“You’re not protected,” she stated.

“A Whole Disservice”

ProPublica and ABC15 requested the most important prosecutorial places of work in Arizona and throughout the nation how they resolve whether or not to hunt the loss of life penalty. The newsrooms discovered that no two counties deal with decision-making the identical approach, however Maricopa County is an outlier for obscuring almost each side of its committee’s work.

The ACLU sued the Maricopa County Lawyer’s Workplace in 2019 for entry to the committee’s membership and different information. Jared Keenan, the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona’s authorized director, stated the group thought-about the information vital to the general public’s understanding of the loss of life penalty.

“Prosecuting companies have an unimaginable quantity of energy, and that energy is at its peak once they make life-and-death choices,” Keenan stated. “The general public must know who’s concerned in making these choices to have the ability to be sure that these choices are made responsibly, constitutionally, ethically.”

The county opposed releasing the knowledge. “They had been combating to maintain this particular info from the general public for years and years,” Keenan stated. A decide didn’t order the county to launch the committee information to the general public.

At ProPublica and ABC15’s request, the county lawyer’s workplace shared a coverage doc itemizing the composition of the Capital Overview Committee however stated the doc is “considerably old-fashioned.” It listed as committee members: the deputy chief of the Legal Division; the division chiefs from the Capital Litigation Bureau, Main Offenders Division and Particular Victims Division; and the Neighborhood Primarily based Prosecution Division chiefs. The coverage permits the county lawyer to designate different committee members.

In an announcement, the county lawyer’s workplace reiterated that Mitchell makes the ultimate determination after contemplating a variety of knowledge.

Nonetheless, the choice can really feel opaque to victims’ members of the family.

When prosecutors sought the loss of life penalty towards Octavia Rogers within the killing of her three younger kids in the summertime of 2016, they went towards the household’s needs, in keeping with Rogers’ aunt, Sherry Spooney. Spooney and her household had misplaced three younger family within the killing and didn’t wish to lose Rogers to the loss of life penalty, too. “What wouldn’t it remedy? How wouldn’t it assist the state of affairs?” she stated.

Prosecutors by no means spoke to the household about how they arrived at their determination, Spooney stated.

The Maricopa County Lawyer’s Workplace stated it reached out to the household.

Spooney known as their secrecy “disheartening” and stated it brought about her to marvel if the workplace had its personal agenda in pursuing the loss of life penalty. “It’s a complete disservice, to not simply the household, however the victims of the household. And on this case, we’re each, we’re one and the identical, and in the event that they’re going to make choices for another person, it must be recognized.”

Final yr, after Rogers was discovered incompetent to face trial, she pleaded “responsible besides insane,” which means she didn’t know on the time of her crime that the act was fallacious. Rogers is being held on the Arizona State Hospital.

Valencia recalled that when the case towards her brother’s killer was delayed, she initially blamed protection attorneys for dragging out the proceedings, however the committee’s secrecy was additionally contributing to the delay. Attorneys for Hernandez, the defendant, had found a member of the Capital Overview Committee had a possible battle of curiosity: A former protection lawyer for Hernandez in an unrelated case had since change into a prosecutor and was on the committee that voted to reject a plea deal for Hernandez. (The plea deal included the noncapital case as properly.)

Prosecutors fought for almost three years to maintain the committee’s membership and its votes secret in a case that reached the Arizona Supreme Courtroom. A decide ultimately decided there was no battle of curiosity within the Hernandez case.

Years later, when prosecutors withdrew the loss of life penalty cost towards Hernandez, Valencia stated she agreed with the choice despite the fact that she’d as soon as thought it will be the one simply final result.

“It took such a toll on our household, at that time, I used to be simply prepared for it to be finished,” she stated.