Charles Harris: Death penalty in Florida a study in inefficiency
~~By Charles Harris, By Charles Harris
~~By Charles Harris, By Charles Harris
The Legislative proposal for a constitutional amendment to transfer
from the Supreme Court to itself the authority to establish procedures
relating to post-conviction or collateral review of capital cases is a
tacit admission that capital punishment in Florida is ineffective and
inefficient.
Since the last six executions in Florida involved inmates who had lingered on death row in excess of 25 years, one must agree capital punishment is inefficient. The fact that we have executed only 7 percent of those sent to death row since capital punishment was reinstated makes it foolish to suggest that capital punishment is a deterrent.
Even agreeing that capital punishment has major flaws, what will the proposed amendment accomplish, other than drive an additional wedge between the legislative and judicial branches?
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to reduce the time between judgment and execution. The motivation is understandable, but the accomplishment of the goal is near impossible.
Our Supreme Court has worked diligently to review and revise the rules to make the system more efficient, always with the rights of the accused in mind.
The obstacles facing this legislatively proposed "quick fix" are the Florida and United States Constitutions, the due process rights of the accused and the federal habeas corpus proceedings which enforce these rights.
The Legislature simply will not be able to substantially reduce the time within which a convicted capital defendant can seek redress and still provide the due process that citizens expect and the courts require.
Many, particularly the family and friends of the victim, are frustrated that it takes so long for a convicted murderer to finally face justice. They want to see the matter finally resolved. Even they, however, will agree it is better to let the system work in a way to make sure an innocent person is not executed in some rush to execution.
As good as juries and judges are, they are not perfect. We are blessed with a good and fair appellate process to carefully and fully review their work.
Closure does not require the death penalty.
What the victims' families really want is the harshest sentence available. If the harshest sentence is life without parole, most would find that acceptable. This is evident by the fact more and more states are abandoning capital punishment.
The Legislature should recognize that not only is capital punishment inefficient and ineffective, it is also outrageously expensive. The projected average cost for a life sentence without parole for the last six inmates executed is $1,116,750.
This is determined by multiplying the cost of incarceration per year ($25,071) times the life expectancy of the inmate when he was admitted to death row, totaling the cost of all six inmates and then dividing by six.
Actually executing these inmates cost between $6,121,000 and $25,500,000 each.
These figures are arrived at by adding the undisputable cost related exclusively to the death penalty: the additional cost of housing the inmates on death row [an extra $8,668 per year] times the number of inmates on death row [now in excess of 400] for a total of $3,467,200. Adding the cost of the collateral attorneys [their budget for 2010-2011 was $8,775,000,] the total comes to $12,242,200.
Since the last six executions occurred over a three-year period (three in 2012, two in 2011 and one in 2010) this minimum cost must be tripled to $36,726,600 and divided by six to get an average per execution. The maximum average figure is determined similarly by using the Death Penalty Information Center's estimates that the total annual cost to Florida to maintain the death penalty is $51,000,000. Martin Grossman, executed in 2010 for the 1984 killing of wildlife officer Peggy Park, cost the state between $12,242,200 and $51,000,000.
Instead of pushing a constitutional amendment that might do more harm than good, the legislators should take a statesman-like position and conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the death penalty.
They might be surprised.
Charles M. Harris of Titusville, Senior Judge of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, was a member of the appellate court from 1989 to 2003.
Since the last six executions in Florida involved inmates who had lingered on death row in excess of 25 years, one must agree capital punishment is inefficient. The fact that we have executed only 7 percent of those sent to death row since capital punishment was reinstated makes it foolish to suggest that capital punishment is a deterrent.
Even agreeing that capital punishment has major flaws, what will the proposed amendment accomplish, other than drive an additional wedge between the legislative and judicial branches?
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to reduce the time between judgment and execution. The motivation is understandable, but the accomplishment of the goal is near impossible.
Our Supreme Court has worked diligently to review and revise the rules to make the system more efficient, always with the rights of the accused in mind.
The obstacles facing this legislatively proposed "quick fix" are the Florida and United States Constitutions, the due process rights of the accused and the federal habeas corpus proceedings which enforce these rights.
The Legislature simply will not be able to substantially reduce the time within which a convicted capital defendant can seek redress and still provide the due process that citizens expect and the courts require.
Many, particularly the family and friends of the victim, are frustrated that it takes so long for a convicted murderer to finally face justice. They want to see the matter finally resolved. Even they, however, will agree it is better to let the system work in a way to make sure an innocent person is not executed in some rush to execution.
As good as juries and judges are, they are not perfect. We are blessed with a good and fair appellate process to carefully and fully review their work.
Closure does not require the death penalty.
What the victims' families really want is the harshest sentence available. If the harshest sentence is life without parole, most would find that acceptable. This is evident by the fact more and more states are abandoning capital punishment.
The Legislature should recognize that not only is capital punishment inefficient and ineffective, it is also outrageously expensive. The projected average cost for a life sentence without parole for the last six inmates executed is $1,116,750.
This is determined by multiplying the cost of incarceration per year ($25,071) times the life expectancy of the inmate when he was admitted to death row, totaling the cost of all six inmates and then dividing by six.
Actually executing these inmates cost between $6,121,000 and $25,500,000 each.
These figures are arrived at by adding the undisputable cost related exclusively to the death penalty: the additional cost of housing the inmates on death row [an extra $8,668 per year] times the number of inmates on death row [now in excess of 400] for a total of $3,467,200. Adding the cost of the collateral attorneys [their budget for 2010-2011 was $8,775,000,] the total comes to $12,242,200.
Since the last six executions occurred over a three-year period (three in 2012, two in 2011 and one in 2010) this minimum cost must be tripled to $36,726,600 and divided by six to get an average per execution. The maximum average figure is determined similarly by using the Death Penalty Information Center's estimates that the total annual cost to Florida to maintain the death penalty is $51,000,000. Martin Grossman, executed in 2010 for the 1984 killing of wildlife officer Peggy Park, cost the state between $12,242,200 and $51,000,000.
Instead of pushing a constitutional amendment that might do more harm than good, the legislators should take a statesman-like position and conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the death penalty.
They might be surprised.
Charles M. Harris of Titusville, Senior Judge of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, was a member of the appellate court from 1989 to 2003.
Courtesy: SunSentinel.com
