If You Can Do a Summary of This Opinion - My Hat's Off to You

Late last week, the 5th Circuit (a divided panel) stayed the execution of Rolando Ruiz. I wouldn't want to turn this blog into a death penalty blog, but this opinion vividly shows how messed up the law is in this area. Part of the fault is your US Congress, part belongs to the 5th Circuit, and a great part belongs to your Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

Now, for Mr. Ruiz. It seems that everyone agrees that Mr. Ruiz had horrible lawyers appointed to his case by the State of Texas. When he was on trial, his lawyer(s) failed utterly to investigate or to present a case for mitigation of punishment. One side of this argument likes to talk about this as the "bad childhood / not enough hugs" kind of defense. The other side notes that there is but one chance to convince a jury that there is a reason to let the defendant live. Both would have to agree that this is an important part of a death penalty case.

Mr. Ruiz' lawyers were called "appallingly inept" and egregiously deficient" by the federal courts. Naturally, with those characterizations, one would assume that Mr. Ruiz would get another shot at punishment. Not so fast.

When it was time for Mr. Ruiz to make this argument, the lawyer was again inept, and failed to make this claim during a State Habeas Corpus petition. That's easily fixed, right? When he gets to federal court, the federal judge will allow him to return to State Court and make the "significant, potentially meritorious claim", Right? Nope.

The Federal Judge said that, by failing to make the argument, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals would reject the claim as procedurally barred because it was not made at the proper time. So, the Federal Judge sends Ruiz off for execution. The 5th Circuit affirmed.

Not deterred, Ruiz applies for relief from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and the Court cannot even get all of the judges to participate in the consideration of the case. But, they deny relief - without saying whether they think that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim is barred, or lacks merit. They just deny.

Back to federal court goes Ruiz - now armed, he thinks, with a decision that the Texas Court has denied him relief on the claim that he had appallingly inept counsel at trial, on appeal and in his habeas petition. Problem solved? Nope.

The 5th Circuit panel is confused by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals failure to say why they denied relief. So, they assume that relief was denied on the merits -- at least 2 of the judges do - with one judge saying that Ruiz should be executed because he hasn't followed proper procedure.

Now, somebody can explain to me who deserves the blame for capital cases to take so long to get to resolution. In this case, it wouldn't appear that its the inmate's fault. One doesn't have to be morally opposed to a death penalty to be adamantly opposed to the American system of imposing the penalty.