Former Attorney for the Maryland Public Defender Organization
Con to the question "Should the Death Penalty Be Allowed?"
"A decision not to seek the death penalty against a defendant has large and immediate cost-saving consequences. The sooner that decision is made, the larger the savings. Since the death penalty ultimately is sough against only a small number of the defendants charged with death-eligible offenses, the process for identifying those defendants should be expeditious in order to preserve funding and minimize the unnecessary expenditure of resources. The current process, however is not expeditious; rather, even in cases in which authorization for capital prosecution is viewed as unlikely by both the prosecution and the defense, the process is lengthy and seemingly inefficient, involving multiple levels of review, and results in unnecessaru costs being incurred."
"Report to the Committee on Defender Services Judicial Conference of the Unites States Update on the Cost and Quality of Defense Representation in Federal Death Penalty Cases," www.uscourts.gov (accessed Aug. 9, 2012), Sep. 2010
Experts Individuals with MDs, JDs, PhDs, or equivalent advanced degrees in fields relevant to death penalty issues. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to death penalty issues.
Involvement and Affiliations:
Member, Federal Death Penalty Resource Counsel
Former Attorney, Maryland Public Defender Organization
Member, National Advisory Mental Health Council
Washington, DC Public Defender Service
Death Penalty Representation Issues for the Defender Services Division of the Administrative Office of the US Courts