Unintended consequences of new death penalty rules
At least five pending capital punishment cases could be affected by new evidence restrictions in death penalty cases recently adopted by the General Assembly, The Washington Post is reporting.
One of those cases involves the 2007 shooting of a police officer in Washington County, according to the newspaper.
The restrictions were approved by the Assembly as part of a compromise hatched in the Maryland Senate. Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, was seeking a repeal of the death penalty. Many lawmakers wanted to keep it. What happened was a law to restrict murder cases that include DNA or other biological evidence, a videotape of the crime or a voluntary, video-recorded confession.
Some prosecutors say those limits will create an effective end to the death penalty.
Under the legal language of the compromise, the restrictions would be in place for cases that are decided after Oct. 1, and officials are saying that five cases could fall in that category – meaning the death penalty may not apply.
The Washington County police shooting has the potential to attract the most attention.
“This is certainly going to cause some righteous indignation among my constituents and law-enforcement officers statewide,” Del. Chris Shank, the House Republican whip from Western Maryland, told the Post.








Comments
David,
Why is this an unintented consequence? Wasn't the legislature and O'Malley trying to do just this? They wanted stricter rules. Before the House passed this they said it would make almost every single case invalid. Jim Brochin is proud of this fact as he championed these changes. So why do you say unintended?
-----------------------
Allen: I say unintended because lawmakers wanted the changes to affect prospective cases, not pending cases.
-- David
Posted by: Allen Jakintsky | April 27, 2009 5:02 PM