January 2006

The Supreme Court today reinstated the death sentence for California inmate Ronald Sanders who was found guilty of murder with special circumstances. This is the latest Ninth Circuit court ruling to be overturned in what seems to be a marathon of legislation by judicial fiat from that court; repeatedly, this court has been overruled for it’s outrageous decisions that seem designed to challenge law rather than interpret it.

From AP via the Washington Times: Top court reinstates inmate’s death sentence

A divided Supreme Court reinstated a California inmate’s death sentence yesterday, the first 5-4 vote under newly installed Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

Justices overturned an appeals court ruling that declared Ronald Sanders’ sentence unconstitutional. Sanders was put on death row for the 1982 killing of a woman during a drug-related robbery in Bakersfield, Calif.

The case presented a technical question for the court involving jurors’ consideration of invalid aggravating factors. Two of the four special circumstances used by prosecutors in their case against Sanders — that the crime was committed during a burglary and was cruel or heinous — were later found invalid.

California argued that Sanders would have been eligible for a death sentence even without those factors. The Supreme Court’s five conservative members agreed.

“The erroneous factor could not have ‘skewed’ the sentence, and no constitutional violation occurred,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an opinion joined by Justice Roberts, retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

Dissenting, Justice John Paul Stevens said, “This decision is more likely to complicate than to clarify our capital sentencing jurisprudence.” He was joined in dissent by Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, although their reasons varied.

Note this is the first 5 votes to 4 ruling since Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court. Justice O’Connor ruled for the reinstatement and as Justice Scalia noted, it would have been the same had Judge Alito been in O’Connor’s stead.

My prediction, is this will be the first of many 5 to 4 votes with Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy in the majority, and Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer in dissent. The Democrats are just gonna hate that.

Here’s some more history on this case: From the Supreme Court Blog:

Friday, October 07, 2005
Cases for Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2005
No. 04-980 Brown v. Sanders
In California, a jury can find that a murder conviction warrants the death penalty by finding that special circumstances make the murder particularly bad. In this case, the jury found four special circumstances specified by California law and sentenced respondent Ronald Sanders to death. On appeal, the California Supreme Court set aside two of the special circumstances, but held that the jury would have imposed the death sentence anyway.

Sanders brought a habeas corpus challenge to his death sentence and the Ninth Circuit set it aside. The court held that the California Supreme Court couldn’t know whether the jury would have imposed the death sentence if it only had found two of the special circumstances.

The resolution of this case may depend on whether California is a “weighing” state, in which case the California Supreme Court should have either reweighed the factors or held that the overturned circumstances were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. California takes the position that it doesn’t matter because the jury only needed to find one special circumstance in order to impose a death sentence.

So, just when does this Sanders guy get smoked?