Attorney wants separate trials in Ga. baby killing

SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) — A 15-year-old boy charged with felony murder in a baby's shooting is "more of a witness than a defendant" and should be tried in court separately from an older teenager accused of being the gunman, a defense attorney said Tuesday.

The two teenagers are awaiting trial in coastal Brunswick in the March 21 slaying of Antonio Santiago, a 13-month-old boy who was shot in the face while sitting in his stroller. Police say both suspects were trying to rob the baby's mother as she walked on the street a few blocks from her apartment.

The lawyer for Dominique Lang said in a phone interview Tuesday her client took no part in any shooting or robbery attempt. Attorney Kimberly L. Copeland said she's afraid Lang won't get a fair trial if the same jury hears both suspects' cases at once.

"My client's more of a witness than a defendant," Copeland said. "My client didn't participate in anything."

Copeland has filed a motion asking a Superior Court judge to scheduled separate trials for Lang and his co-defendant, 17-year-old De'Marquise Elkins.

Elkins is charged with malice murder and an indictment March 27 identified him as the suspected shooter. His attorney, Kevin Gough, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment Tuesday evening.

Lang's attorney noted that Elkins is also charged in another shooting and robbery that happened 10 days before the baby was slain. Prosecutors haven't charged Lang in that second crime, and Copeland said she's concerned it might tarnish him in the eyes of a jury.

"I think my client would be prejudiced by going to trial with (Elkins)," Copeland said. "And if the jury found (Elkins) guilty, they would automatically find my client guilty."

The baby's mother, Sherry West, has said they were walking home from the post office when two youths approached her and asked for money. She said that when she refused the older teen drew a gun and shot her in the leg before shooting her baby in the face. West said she identified Elkins as the gunman from a police photo lineup of 24 mug shots.

Both suspects are scheduled for arraignment before Superior Court Judge Stephen Kelley on April 18.

The judge said during a hearing last week that he wants to hold Elkins' trial before the end of the year. He made no mention of Lang's case.

View the original article here

Texas bill would require DNA testing before death-penalty trials

By Corrie MacLaggan

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - A law proposed in Texas would require all biological evidence collected in cases in which the state is seeking the death penalty to undergo DNA testing before trial, a change intended to reduce the risk of an innocent person being put to death.

Texas executes more prisoners than any other state. The bill's Democratic author, state Senator Rodney Ellis, said he was unaware of any other state having a similar law.

His proposal has also won the backing of the state's Republican attorney general.

"This law is a safeguard to help ensure no innocent person will be executed in Texas," said Attorney General Greg Abbott, who announced his support for the proposal at a press conference on Tuesday.

"If you're innocent, you're going to find out that your exoneration will come sooner," Abbott added. "If you are guilty, justice will be more swift and more certain. This law will also help prevent the seemingly endless appeals that do nothing more than game the system and delay justice."

Texas has executed 493 people since capital punishment was reinstated in the United States in 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Virginia has had the second-largest number of executions, 110.

There have been 303 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States, according to the Innocence Project. Of those exonerated, 18 served time on death row and an additional 16 were charged with capital crimes but did not receive a death sentence.

"We know that sometimes we get the wrong person," said Ellis, who represents parts of Houston. "There may be more men and women serving on death row today who did not commit a crime for which they were convicted."

Ellis pointed to the case of Michael Morton, an innocent man who spent nearly 25 years in prison for the murder of his wife before DNA evidence exonerated him. While Morton did not face the death penalty, Ellis said his case exemplifies the problem of wrongful conviction.

"Texas state government has been sensitized to the failures of its criminal justice system through the exoneration cases and particularly through the Michael Morton case," said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, a nonprofit that aims to improve the quality of representation afforded those facing the death penalty.

Abbott said conducting DNA testing before a trial rather than after would prevent people who have been convicted from asking for repeated tests of evidence.

Under the proposal, the state would pay for the DNA testing. Abbott and Ellis said they weren't yet sure how much that might cost.

Stephen Saloom, policy director at the Innocence Project, a non-profit legal clinic dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted people, said Ellis' bill was a good idea, but that he was uncertain whether such legislation was necessary.

"This should already be happening as a matter of practice," he said.

All states except Oklahoma have laws allowing post-conviction access to DNA evidence, although the laws vary, according to the Innocence Project. Some of the laws don't allow access to DNA in cases in which the defendant confessed to the crime or don't require adequate preservation of DNA evidence, the Innocence Project says.

Abbott and Ellis both support the death penalty.

Abbott said he did not believe Texas has executed any innocent people, noting that the state has an exhaustive process in place to ensure that doesn't happen.

Ellis was not so sure.

"I just don't know," he said. "I worry about it."

(Reporting by Corrie MacLaggan; Editing by Scott Malone and Leslie Gevirtz)

View the original article here