DURHAM, N.C. - The case of North Carolinian Charles Ray Finch, 81, released last month after more than 40 years in prison for a 1976 murder he did not commit, spotlights some of the problems with death-penalty convictions.

Finch was convicted and sentenced under what was then a state law that made the death penalty mandatory for certain crimes. On the day he was sentenced, the U.S. Supreme Court declared mandatory death sentences unconstitutional, and Finch was given life in prison. James Coleman, a Duke University law professor and Finch's attorney, said the timing may have saved Finch's life.

"If the court had not declared the death penalty unconstitutional," Coleman said, "I think there is a very good chance that Ray would have been executed years ago, and that we would have not been able to develop the evidence to show that he was innocent."

Because there was no biological or DNA evidence to prove Finch's innocence, Coleman said, he and a team of attorneys at Duke's Wrongful Convictions Clinic had to re-investigate the case from the ground up. It took more than 15 years to prove that Finch did not commit the crime. The principal evidence against Finch was an eyewitness identification, a person at the crime scene who identified Finch by the type of clothing he was wearing in a lineup. Before DNA evidence, Coleman said, these types of eyewitness-based convictions were routine.

"What we know is, the kinds of errors that were made in Ray Finch's case were made in other cases during that period," he said. "Nobody could credibly believe that there weren't mistakes made in other cases that resulted in an innocent person being sentenced to death."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which overturned Finch's conviction, said the evidence, both old and new, would fail to convince any reasonable juror of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are now 142 people on death row in North Carolina.

Alabama lawmakers are weighing a proposal to overhaul the state's bail system.

House Bill 42, sponsored by Sen. Christopher England, D-Tuscaloosa, would amend the Alabama Bail Reform Act, allowing courts to accept a partial cash deposit from a defendant instead of requiring the full bail amount - if approved by a judge.

England said the change would keep more money within the court system, which would benefit both the state and the people who are owed restitution.

"It affords a defendant an opportunity to get out and pay cash directly to the court," he said. "And what that does is, in the event that that person then does not return, the court keeps the cash - pays fines, pays court costs and also pays restitution."

Under the current law, a defendant must pay the full cash bail amount up front, in order to be released before trial. This bill would allow judges to approve partial cash deposits instead. In a public hearing on the bill this week, opponents raised concerns about accountability.

Victor Howard, vice president of the Alabama Bail Bond Association, warned that what he sees as loosening bail requirements could lead to more defendants skipping court, ultimately making it harder to ensure they face justice.

"If this bill is passed, that's what we're going to be introducing into this state. We're going to have the exact opposite of accountability, people appearing for court," he said. "If they do miss and they're out on a percentage bond, a warrant would be issued. They'll be put on a case administrative docket, and that's it."

England pushed back against those claims, arguing that bail bonds don't guarantee a person's attendance. He noted that the state has missed out on significant court revenue because of bond forfeitures when defendants fail to appear.

"The only way that, nine times out of ten, we get the money to our court system is through a percentage bond on cash," he said. "Basically you're choosing between either that money going to a bondsman - where we don't ever see it in the court system - or we get cash, so in the event that they show up, at least you get some of the money that they owe."

House Bill 42 awaits a vote in the House Judiciary Committee.

As spring approaches, faith leaders and advocates are raising alarms about inhumane heat conditions in U.S. prisons, especially in southern states such as Mississippi, where extreme temperatures threaten the lives of incarcerated individuals and staff.

During a recent webinar, "85 to Stay Alive: Answering the Call," hosted by Texas Prison Community Advocates and the Climate and Incarceration Research Collective, panelists shared harrowing stories and urged action before summer heat arrives.

The Rev. Joseph Clark, assistant imam at the 5th Ward Islamic Center for Human Development in Texas, recounted his own prison experiences, describing dangerous conditions caused by extreme heat.

"It would be so hot on the unit that we would break out the windows on the turn roller so air can come through the window," he said, "and the warden would not fix the window purposely for when it got cold, so during winter conditions we would freeze to death."

The problem is severe in Mississippi, where many prisons lack air conditioning. Reports frequently expose extreme heat at the Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman, where cell temperatures often exceed 100 degrees. The Justice Department has found conditions at Parchman and two other state prisons unconstitutional.

Amite Dominick, founder and president of Texas Prison Community Advocates, warned that climate change is causing longer, hotter summers, escalating risks in prisons. She urged leaders to act quickly to protect human rights.

"We do consider it to be cruel and unusual punishment and a violation of an individuals 8th Amendment rights," she said. "Essentially, what we're asking for is that temperatures are maintained between 65 and 85 heat index within all of our Texas prisons and within all of our prisons across the nation."

Advocates also emphasized the toll on prison staff, who endure the same sweltering conditions. As Mississippi and other southern states face growing pressure to address prison conditions, advocates are urging policymakers to invest in air conditioning and other cooling measures, arguing that current practices are inhumane.


get more stories like this via email

More than 153,000 Kentuckians are still being denied the right to vote because of a past felony conviction, according to recent data from the League of Women Voters of Kentucky.

More than 191,000 Kentuckians regained the right to vote under Gov. Andy Beshear's 2019 executive order, yet the report found the Commonwealth of Kentucky disenfranchised more than 4.5% of its voting-eligible population in last year's presidential election.

Tip Moody, member of the League of Women Voters of Kentucky, said the state is experiencing a troubling trend.

"We are now number four in the country," Moody pointed out. "We are worse in our percentage of disenfranchised citizens than we were two years ago."

Between April 2020 and last Jan. 2, the Kentucky Department of Corrections vetted and forwarded 815 individual petitions requesting a partial pardon to the Office of the Governor. So far during his time in office, Beshear has granted 114 pardons.

Becky Jones, vice president of the League of Women Voters of Kentucky, said the state has lagged behind on the issue of voting rights restoration because it has not been a priority among lawmakers.

"I think it could be a priority for legislators if the public started applying pressure to them to make them understand how important it is to them," Jones observed. "We're talking about hundreds of thousands of people that have been affected."

Kentucky is one of only three states in the country to disenfranchise or strip away the right to vote for a citizen who has committed a felony offense for the rest of their life.

Moody explained he had his voting rights restored but pointed out the journey for most other residents is an uphill battle.

"People like me, regardless of what is in our past and what we are doing in our present, there is still a stigma associated with that, and there is a lack of value," Moody added.

The report showed nearly 2,000 Kentuckians with felony convictions had their sentences extended in the past year, because they could not pay what the court ordered them to pay, creating a further barrier to having the means to begin the voting rights restoration process.


get more stories like this via email