« Ind. Courts - "Virtual Tours" of Indiana's Courthouses | Main | Law - Access to Abortion Pared at State Level »

Monday, August 29, 2005

Ind. Courts - Governor spares one; Supreme Court sets execution date for another [Updated 8/30]

At 12:40 PM the Indianapolis Star posted this story on its website that begins:

Gov. Mitch Daniels today commuted the sentence of convicted killer Arthur P. Baird II to life without the possibility of parole.

Baird was just hours away from eating his last meal in the Indiana State Prison at Michigan City when his attorney, Sarah L. Nagy, received the word.

Baird was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection early Wednesday for killing his parents in 1985.

“The case of Arthur Baird would justify the death penalty based upon the nature of his crimes, the unchallenged certainty that he committed them, and the care and completeness of the legal process in imposing that sentence and in consistently upholding it over the years since those crimes occurred,” Daniels said in a written clemency statement issued shortly after noon.

“Nonetheless, given certain unusual, probably unique circumstances in this case, a different outcome seems more just.”

Governor Daniels' clemency statement does not appear to be available online at this time.

"Court rejects pleas, sets execution date" is th headline to this AP story, posted on the Indianapolis Star site at 12:16 PM. Some quotes:

The Indiana Supreme Court ordered today that a man convicted of beating his former wife to death in 1989 while he was out of prison on a brief furlough be executed Sept. 28. * * *

[Alan] Matheney was convicted of forcing his way into Lisa Bianco’s home in Mishawaka a few hours after his release on an eight-hour pass from a prison. As their two daughters fled in terror, Matheney chased Bianco into the street and beat her outside a neighbor’s home with an unloaded .410-guage shotgun.

The state’s prison furlough program was suspended after Bianco’s death and later reinstated with tightened restrictions that would have prevented Matheney’s release.

The Supreme Court's order does not appear to be available online at this time. Here is what is available from the Court's docket:
8/29/05 ISSUED THE ENCLOSED ORDER:
8/29/05 MATHENEY HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING A REASON-
ABLE POSSIBILITY THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO POST-CONVICTION RELIEF.
ACCORDINGLY, WE DECLINE TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A SUCCESSIVE
PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF. A DATE FOR EXECUTION OF
THE DEATH SENTENCE WILL BE SET BY SEPARATE ORDER.
BECAUSE MATHENEY HAS ALREADY RECEIVED EXTENSIVE JUDICIAL
REVIEW OF HIS DEATH SENTENCE AND THERE IS PENDING BEFORE US THE
STATE'S MOTION REQUESTING THAT A DATE BE SET FOR EXECUTION OF
THE DEATH SENTENCE, ANY REQUEST FOR REHEARING MUST BE PROMPT.
REHEARING SHOULD NOT BE SOUGHT IF MATHENEY INTENDS MERELY TO
RAISE THE SAME ARGUMENTS WE HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED. IF HE DOES
PETITION FOR REHEARING, HOWEVER, THE PETITION MUST BE PHYSICALLY
FILED WITH THE CLERK NO LATER THAN (FIVE DAYS AFTER THIS ORDER),
2005. THE STATE'S RESPONSE MUST BE PHYSICALLY FILED WITH THE
CLERK NO LATER THAN (FIVE DAYS AFTER THAT), 2005. TO MINIMIZE
ANY DELAY IN THE SERVICE AND RECEIPT OF PAPERS, THE ATTORNEYS
ARE ORDERED TO CERTIFY IN PAPERS PRESENTED FOR FILING THAT
COPIES HAVE BEEN SENT BY FAX OR ELECTRONIC MAIL TO OPPOSING
COUNSEL AND TO THE DIVISION OF SUPREME COURT ADMINISTRATION
(FAX NUMBER 317/232-8372).
RANDALL T. SHEPARD, CHIEF JUSTICE
SHEPARD, C.J., AND DICKSON, SULLIVAN AND BOEHM, JJ., CONCUR.
RUCKER, J., CONCURS WITH SEPARATE OPINION. KM
8/29/05 ****** ABOVE ENTRY MAILED ******
8/29/05 ******** STATE'S RESPONSE TO REHEARING MUST BE FILED WITHIN
FIVE DAYS FROM DATE REHEARING IS FILED ******************** KM
8/29/05 ISSUED THE ENCLOSED ORDER:
8/29/05 MATHENEY HAS THUS COMPLETED THE REVIEW OF THE CONVICTIONS
AND SENTENCE TO WHICH HE IS ENTITLED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT, AND
THE STATE HAS FILED A MOTION TO SET A DATE FOR EXECUTION OF THE
SENTENCE. THERE BEING NO STAY OF EXECUTION NOW IN EFFECT, IT
IS ORDERED THAT THE EXECUTION OF THE DEATH SENTENCE IMPOSED ON
ALAN MATHENEY BE CARRIED OUT SEPTEMBER 28, 2005, BEFORE THE HOUR
OF SUNRISE. THIS ORDER SHALL CONSITUTE THE WARRANT FOR
EXECUTION DESCRIBED IN INDIANA CODE 35-50-6-2 & 3, AND THE
SUPERINTENDENT/WARDEN OF THE INDIANA STATE PRISON IS DIRECTED
TO CARRY OUT THE EXECUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH INDIANA LAW.
RANDALL T. SHEPARD, CHIEF JUSTICE
SHEPARD, C.J., AND DICKSON, SULLIVAN, BOEHM AND RUCKER, JJ.,
CONCUR. KM
8/29/05 ****** ABOVE ENTRY MAILED ******

[Update 8/30/05] The Court's 8/29/05 order in Alan Matheney v. State of Indiana is now available. Justice Rucker writes in his concurring opinion:

Rucker, J., concurring. I concur with the majority’s decision to deny Matheney’s request to file a successive petition for post-conviction relief. I continue to believe that a sentence of death is inappropriate for a person suffering a severe mental illness. See Corcoran v. State, 774 N.E.2d 495, 502-03 (Ind. 2002) (Rucker, J., dissenting) (expressing the view that a death sentence for a seriously mentally ill person “violates the Cruel and Unusual Punishment provision of the Indiana Constitution.”). Here however, Matheney presents nothing to this court even remotely demonstrating that he is presently mentally ill or that he is “unaware of the punishment [he is] about to suffer and why [he is] to suffer it.” See Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399, 422 (1986) (Powell, J., concurring). Rather, although making oblique references to his present mental state, Matheney premises his claim for relief on the ground that he was mentally ill at the time of the murder. This claim has been decided against Matheney in earlier appeals. I therefore agree that Matheney has failed to establish a reasonable possibility that he is entitled to post-conviction relief.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 29, 2005 02:13 PM
Posted to Indiana Courts