« Ind. Gov't. - Deer action shot down | Main | Ind. Law - Impact of same sex marriage ban in Ohio and Michigan Constitutions may portend Indiana issues »
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Ind. Courts - Brizzi questions judge's impartiality
A story today in the Indianapolis Star by Vic Ryckaert reports:
Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi said Wednesday that Judge Grant Hawkins opposes the death penalty, and that's why Brizzi wants another judge to preside over the trial of an accused child killer."The appearance of a bias will erode the public confidence in a fair and impartial judiciary," Brizzi said. "The only way to fix it is for (Hawkins) to recuse himself and have another judge hear the case."
In documents filed Wednesday, Brizzi asked Hawkins to hand the death penalty trial of Jeffrey Voss to a different judge. Voss is accused in the Christmas Eve abduction, rape and murder of 12-year-old Christina Tedder. Brizzi cited Hawkins' past rulings and public statements as proof the judge believes Indiana's death penalty law is unconstitutional.
Before winning his seat on the bench, Brizzi said, Hawkins was found to have provided ineffective representation for two defendants in death cases; both men successfully appealed their death sentences. "All that taken as a whole shows an appearance of bias," Brizzi said. * * *
Since donning the robes in 2001, Hawkins has twice overturned death penalty cases. Each time, he's been overruled.
In September 2001, Hawkins ruled the state law unconstitutional and threw out the death penalty against Charles E. Barker, who was found guilty in the 1993 murders of Francis and Helen Benefiel in Indianapolis. The Indiana Supreme Court overturned Hawkins in April 2002.
In June 2003, Hawkins again found Indiana law unconstitutional, this time dismissing the death penalty against Barker and Chijoike Bomani Ben-Yisrayl, convicted in September 1984 of the murder and rape of Debra Weaver, 21, who was abducted from her Northeastside home.
Hawkins ruled that a provision in Indiana law giving judges the power to overturn a jury's verdict didn't jibe with U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Indiana lawmakers have since changed the death penalty statute, making the jury's decision final. * * *
Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson, a member of the county's three-judge executive committee, said judges make decisions based on the law, not their viewpoints. "As trial judges, we have to make those calls on an ongoing basis before the Supreme Court ever weighs in," she said. "Sometimes we're right and sometimes we're wrong."
"We're imposing a legal interpretation, not a personal moral view," she said. "And that's what we're paid to do."
Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 24, 2005 10:38 AM
Posted to Indiana Courts