By Carol Zimmermann, Catholic News Service
WASHINGTON (CNS) — In oral arguments Oct. 11, the Supreme Court thought of the case of Texas inmate Rodney Reed, who has been on demise row for greater than 25 years and has gained the eye of Catholic leaders and celebrities for his claims of innocence.
In this case, the justices have been particularly taking a look at a procedural query: whether or not Reed had been too late in submitting his civil rights lawsuit towards state officers who had rejected his requests for DNA testing of crime-scene proof he hoped would clear him.
Reed, who’s Black, was convicted by an all-white jury of the 1996 homicide of a white lady, Stacey Stites. He has constantly maintained his innocence, explaining that he was in a secret relationship with Stites. His attorneys and activists have stated that proof unearthed since Reed’s trial factors to Stites’ fiancé because the assassin.
So far, the state has denied Reed’s request for DNA testing, saying that proof from the crime scene shouldn’t be examined as a result of the objects have been improperly saved and could possibly be contaminated. A Texas district courtroom agreed in 2014 and three years later, the state’s Criminal Court of Appeals affirmed that call.
Reed took his case to U.S. District Court in Texas and argued that the Texas regulation about post-conviction DNA testing violated his proper to due course of. The state in flip argued that his claims have a statute of limitations of two years that started in 2014 when the state district courtroom made its preliminary resolution not to check the DNA.
In the oral arguments, Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone argued that as time passes, it’s more durable for the state to defend its case as a result of the proof degrades and the witnesses age.
The justices didn’t clearly tip their arms on this case, wrote SCOTUSblog, a web based web site that covers the Supreme Court. The justices requested different questions in regards to the deadline imposed by the decrease courtroom on the timing of Reed’s lawsuit. Some appeared to perceive it, whereas others have been skeptical.
Reed’s execution had been set for November 2019 however was stayed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and despatched again to a decrease courtroom for a evaluate of recent claims. In 2021, after an evidentiary listening to, a district decide stated the brand new proof was not sufficient to give Reed a brand new trial.
Sister Helen Prejean, a Sister of St. Joseph who’s a longtime opponent of the demise penalty, has been drawing consideration to Reed’s case for a number of years, citing the dearth of proof of his guilt.
Similarly, Bishop Joe S. Vasquez of Austin, Texas, stated in a 2019 assertion that if Reed’s execution proceeds, “there is great risk the state of Texas will execute a man who is innocent of this crime while allowing the guilty party to go free.”
The bishop identified on the time that he had joined different state bishops by means of the Texas Catholic Conference in asking Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to grant Reed a keep of execution.
He stated there have been “enough doubts in this case that justice dictates a careful review of the new witness statements and other evidence recently brought forward,” he stated, referring to current statements from different witnesses which have implicated Stites’ fiance, Jimmy Fennell, within the homicide.
The Innocence Project, a nonprofit authorized group dedicated to exonerating wrongly convicted folks by means of the usage of DNA testing, filed an utility for Reed’s clemency with the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles following the sworn affidavit of a witness who stated Fennell confessed to Stites’ homicide when the 2 males have been in jail collectively. Other witnesses have come ahead with related statements.
A call in Reed v. Goertz is anticipated subsequent yr.
story by The Texas Tribune Source link