The Death of the Dealth Penalty? District Court Judge William Sessions Declares Death Penalty Unconstitutional; Decision is Expected to Go Before the Supreme Court

Author: Julie Shumway

On Sept. 24, the Hon. William K. Sessions III, U.S. District Court Judge for Vermont, ruled that the Federal Death Penalty Act (FDPA) of 1994 was unconstitutional.
Sessions' ruling has attracted a great deal of media attention in the last week, due largely to the acknowledgement by legal experts that such a decision may ultimately bring the issue of the death penalty to the Supreme Court. As such, Sessions has focused national attention on the Vermont case of Donald Fell, who motioned to have the death penalty declared unconstitutional for a litany of violations, including violation of the Fifth, Sixth and Eighth amendments.
At issue is admissibility of evidence. Conviction and sentencing are two distinct processes. Under the FDPA, evidence is admitted for a judge to consider in deciding for or against capital punishment that would not be admitted in a trial to convict.
Sessions ultimately ruled that the FDPA does in fact violate both the Fifth and Sixth amendments, by admitting evidence not heard by a trial of one's peers. In his ruling, he wrote, "A defendant is entitled, under the Due Process Clause and the Sixth Amendment, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and to require that these facts be proven by admissible evidence."
Charles A. Dana Professor of Political Science Murray Dry notes that in the Fell case, a statement made by Fell's deceased accomplice which was inadmissible in trial as "hearsay" was considered in sentencing. Such evidence violates the Fifth and Sixth amendments, accodring to Sessions' ruling.
Dry feels that the implications of Sessions' ruling will extend to the national level. In effect, Sessions' ruling "will eliminate the distinction between facts relevant to defense and facts relevant to sentencing," Dry explains.
Dry adds that one must consider retroactivity in this case, and how Sessions' decision will affect all federally-convicted inmates on death row.
Sessions, a Middlebury alumnus, is no stranger to cases regarding criminal law. He has dealt with criminal law as a public defender for Vermont, as well as in his current role as district court judge.
If the case eventually finds its way to the Supreme Court, it will most likely not be Sessions' first such trip.
Legal analysts have predicted his ruling on the unconstitutionality of campaign finance reform efforts in Vermont will likely reach both the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, in the near future (see article, "Campaign Finance Reform"). Whether legal experts are correct or not remains to be seen.