When Utah's attorney general argues death penalty reform, she is haunted by words spoken to her by a 19-year-old parking attendant. "Maybe you knew my mom . . . or you knew of her."
The young man was Troy Hunsaker, the son of Maurine Hunsaker, a convenience store clerk who was kidnapped, then strangled and her throat slashed in 1988. For nearly a decade, her killer, Ralph LeRoy Menzies, has whiled away his days on Utah's death row, filing appeal after appeal.As the pair talked, Troy wept as he wondered aloud at the injustice of a system that allowed his mother's killer to be alive eight years after the brutal killing. His offer to kill Menzies himself was more an expression of grief that refuses to subside.
"We have to have a system more responsive than that," Jan Graham said. "It is unacceptable to have eight or 11 or 12 years go by. It is a re-victimization of these families. They lose hope there is justice.
"We can debate the death penalty until the cows come home. But we have it, and we have to enforce it. Not to (enforce it) makes it all a big lie."
Which is why the Utah attorney general's office has drafted legislation for the 1996 Legislature that will reduce the amount of time spent on death penalty appeals and, in effect, speed up the time between the conviction of a killer and his execution. The reforms could cut two to three years from the appeals process.
The legislation, which corresponds with national reforms being debated by the U.S. Senate, sets time limits on when state judges must rule on habeas corpus petitions. It also calls for the state to pay for the condemned's attorneys through the state appeals process to ensure that claims of ineffective counsel cannot be used as grounds for later appeals.
Graham insists that reforms to Utah habeas corpus protections do not eliminate or reduce constitutional protections. Rather, the reforms will streamline the process by forcing judges to make capital cases a top priority. It also establishes time limits for issues to be raised on appeal, briefs to be filed and legal arguments to be presented.
Presented to representatives of the Utah Supreme Court Thursday, the proposed legislation spurred some concern about changing to a statute what has traditionally been a rule.
"The rules process is very flexible in terms of its speed," said Michael D. Zimmerman, chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court.
"When we think there is a need to proceed quickly, we can proceed faster, maybe, than even legislation," he suggested.
Regarding use of "artificial limits" to speed up the death penalty appeals process, Zimmerman noted that "every case is different" and occassionally such delay is justified.
However, on the whole, the chief justice said he acknowledges the difficulties created by lengthy appeals and generally supports the proposed reform.
"I don't think that any judge would be disturbed by the notion that we should do what we can to move it along faster," he said. "The objective is worthy. And I think everyone is interested in seeing these things shorten up whenever possible.
"My personal view is that this is something that, quite probably, we're going to - at least on procedural issues - come to some common ground," he said.
Under the current system, there are basically four tiers of appeals available to all condemned killers. The first involves mandatory appeal of the death sentence to the Utah Supreme Court. If the case is upheld there, the merits of the case are then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
From there, the case goes back to the state courts for a series of appeals known as habeas corpus in which the inmate challenges the state's right to incarcerate him. Once the state courts have ruled on those petitions, the same habeas corpus appeals are heard by the federal courts.
The reforms proposed by Graham would only reduce the amount of time spent on state habeas corpus appeals. The federal legislation would likewise reduce the amount of time on habeas corpus appeals in the federal court. The federal changes also specify that habeas corpus claims denied in the state courts cannot be resurrected in the federal courts, provided the inmate had effective legal counsel at the state court level.
To help push the reforms, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has promised to personally testify for the bill when it comes before the Legislature. "This is not a partisan issue. It's about standing up for victims," Graham said.
Senate Majority Whip Leonard Blackham, a rural Republican, agrees, adding that Republicans and Democrats alike are appalled with the endless appeals that drag death penalty cases on for years.
"No one wants to execute someone improperly," Blackham said. "But justice should not be something that never occurs. And 13 years (on death row) is not justice."
Currently, there are 10 men on Utah's death row. The man there the longest is Elroy Tillman, convicted of bludgeoning a man to death with an ax in 1982. He was sentenced to death on Jan. 20, 1983.
The most difficult aspect of the habeas corpus reform legislation, at least in terms of getting it passed into law, is the cost. The provision that calls for the state to pay for effective legal counsel through the appeals process will likely carry a price tag of $150,000 to $200,000 a year.
But Blackham said if it speeds up the appeals process it would be money well spent. "It would probably save us money in the long run if we reduced the housing costs (associated with death row inmates in maximum security)," he said. "It wouldn't take very many executions to offset the cost."
But would providing inmates with effective legal counsel mean that more condemned inmates get off on technicalities? David Yocom, a former Salt Lake County prosecutor who now handles death penalty appeals for the attorney general's office, believes little will change except the time spent on appeals.
"We have gotten better at what we do," Yocom said. "The pro bono attorneys (those representing death row inmates free of charge) are very good at what they do, and they have forced us to improve. With the reforms, you will see the courts responding more expe-di-tious-ly."
Since Utah reinstituted the death penalty, the state has carried out four executions, only two of them against the will of the inmate. During that same time, at least six inmates have had their death sentences overturned, and a seventh died before he could be executed.
Setting deadlines for judges to rule is certain to provoke considerable discussion among Utah's judiciary. The exact nature of the deadlines is something "still to be negotiated," she said. "We know they will have strong feelings about it."
The reforms do not address the portion of the appeals process that takes the longest, the initial review of the cases by the Utah Supreme Court. In Menzies' case, the initial review took 76 months. In Tillman's case, it took 61 months. Another case was before the Supreme Court twice for a total of 78 months.
"In my mind, 60 months or more is pushing it," Graham said. "But this is a life at stake, and we want a careful, methodical, error-free look at everything that happened. Maybe it should take awhile."
Considering the exhaustive nature of the initial appeal, there is a less-convincing argument for subsequent appeals taking as long as the first, Graham said. "It's that second round of appeals we are taking aim at."
*****
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Death row: Utah
1. Killer: Elroy V. Tillman
Sentenced to death: Jan. 20, 1983
Crime: Killed the boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend by bludgeoning her with an ax and then burning the house down
Current Appeal: New habeus corpus appeal filed in federal court June 19, 1995.
Time on death row: 153 months.
2. Killer: Ronnie Lee Gardner
Sentenced to death: Oct. 25, 1985
Crime: Shot a lawyer during a courthouse escape attempt
Current Appeal: Habeus corpus petition to U.S. Supreme Court.
Time on death row: 120 months
3. Killer: Douglas Stewart Carter
Sentenced to death: resentenced Jan. 27, 1992
Crime: Stripped, stabbed and shot a 57-year-old woman during a 1985 burglary
Current Appeal: U.S. Supreme Court denied petition, next step state habeus corpus petitions
Time on death row: 118 months
4. Killer: Joseph Mitchell Parsons
Sentenced to death: Jan. 29, 1988
Crime: stabbed driver at a rest area after alleged homosexual advance
Current Appeal: Habeas corpus appeal filed in federal court, with hearing set for Nov. 17.
Time on death row: 92 months
5. Killer: Ralph LeRoy Menzies
Sentenced to death: March 23, 1988
Crime: Kidnapped a clerk, then strangled her and slashed her throat.
Current Appeal: Writ of habeas corpus filed 10 months ago, with petition pending in 3rd District Court.
Time on death row: 91 months
6. Killer: John Albert Taylor
Sentenced to death: Dec. 19, 1989
Crime: Strangled 11-year-old girl during burglary
Current Appeal: Habeus corpus petition denied in Utah Supreme Court Oct. 20.
Time on death row: 70 months
7. Killer: Michael Anthony Archuleta
Sentenced to death: Dec. 21, 1989
Crime: Kidnapped and tortured Southern Utah University student
Current Appeal: State habeus corpus petitions pending
Time on death row: 70 months
8. Killer: James Louis Holland
Sentenced to death: resentenced Feb. 14, 1991
Crime: Driver gave Holland a life, then ordered him out of car in a rainstorm. Holland shot the driver in the head.
Current Appeal: No ruling yet on direct appeal to the Utah Supreme Court.
Time on death row: 97 months
9. Killer: Von Lester Taylor
Sentenced to death: May 24, 1991
Crime: Pleaded guilty to shooting a woman and her mother in an Oakley cabin
Current Appeal: Still on direct appeal. Referred back to district court for hearing on competent counsel.
Time on death row: 52 months
10. Killer: Douglas Anderson Lovell
Sentenced to death: Aug. 5, 1993
Crime: Pleaded guilty to murdering a witness shortly before he was to be tried for sexual assault
Current Appeal: Still on direct appeal. Referred back to district court for hearing on competent counsel.
Time on death row: 27 months