Stop the Execution of Holly Wood, scheduled for September 2nd in Alabama!

Holly Wood execution
Last week the Alabama Supreme Court set an execution date for Holly Wood, a man who was convicted of killing his former girlfriend Ruby Lois Gosha in 1993 and sentenced to death, despite the fact that he has an approximate IQ of 59 – the score for a person of normal intelligence is around 100.
In federal court, the judge threw out the death sentence on the basis that Wood’s lawyer had failed to tell jurors of his client’s serious mental impairment. The Alabama justice system is severely underfunded and only $1,000 was allotted to Wood's defence to prepare for the penalty phase of the trial. In the11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, the dissenting judge criticised a system in which an "inexperienced and overwhelmed attorney" was representing a man indicted on a capital offence. However, the majority voted to resinstate the death penalty when the prosecution successfully argued that Wood’s lawyer had not been “unconstitutionally ineffective”; while he may have made a strategic error it was apparently not such a grave mistake that his client’s life could be spared.
Although the state of Alabama defines any IQ score below 70 as “significantly subaverage intellectual functioning”, Wood did not demonstrate the exact deficiencies in adaptive functioning that Alabama law requires for the accused to be found mentally retarded and thus ineligible for the death penalty under Atkins v Virginia. However, his low intelligence would have been taken into account at the sentencing hearing as a factor clearly suggesting that leniency would be appropriate. As it was, the jury voted 10-2 for the death penalty, the minimum necessary majority.
If the ten jurors in favour of execution had known that the man they were condemning to death only read at a third-grade level, and if even one of them had therefore changed his or her mind, the 2nd of September would pass for Wood like any other day. Instead, unless the Governor of Alabama sees fit to grant clemency, it will be his last day on earth.


Don't let Alabama Execute a Mentally Disabled Man! Change.org 

On September 2, a 50-year-old man is slated for execution in Alabama. There's no doubt about his crime — he was found guilty of shooting an ex-girlfriend. And yet people are pleading with the governor to grant him clemency. The reason? Well, during the trial, his defense attorneys neglected to mention the crucial fact that the man — Holly Wood — is mentally incompetent.

Had his attorneys done so, it's likely that Wood never would have been sentenced to death.

If you want to see an example of our nation's broken indigent defense system, look no further than Wood. His court-appointed attorneys were paid a maximum of just $1,000 for defending Wood, hardly incentive enough to do a thorough job. (inadequate legal representation) What's more, though Wood was on trial in a capital murder case, one of the attorneys charged with defending him hadn't even been practicing law for a full year.

The result? Jurors voted to put Wood to death in a 10 to 2 vote, the absolute minimum required in Alabama for the death penalty.

Back in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that executing those deemed to be "mentally retarded" violated the Eight Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. (That specific case, Atkins v. Virginia, involved a man with an IQ of 59.) The Court declared that execution of such adults served no reasonable purpose. While the mentally retarded may know the difference between right and wrong, the Court reasoned, they were often unable to learn from past mistakes, understand complex interpersonal relationships, or use logical reasoning.

Holly Wood has an IQ of 64. The state of Alabama recognizes an IQ score of 70 as being "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning. Join other members here at Change.org in asking for Governor Bob Riley's mercy.

After the Supreme Court ruling, many states enacted procedures to safeguard against the execution of the mentally retarded. Alabama wasn't among them.

If Wood had been given a more competent set of attorneys — or if he'd been tried in another state, for that matter — he could have received a much different sentence. After all, one competency report (which his attorneys didn't bother to raise during his sentencing) found that Wood read at a third-grade level and was in the "borderline range of intellectual functioning." Though none of this would have negated Wood's guilt, such information shouldn't have been withheld from jurors.

Wood's case made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where this January, the justices upheld his conviction and sentence in a 7-2 vote. Their view was that the defense attorneys had made a strategic decision — not an oversight — in neglecting to mention the fact that Wood lacked mental competency at trial. (For whatever reason, the justices did not discuss the matter of his competency in relation to Atkins v. Virginia.)

Now, Wood's only hope at relief lies with Governor Riley. The Governor is the sole person who can grant clemency and save Holly Wood's life.

For Wood, little more than one month stands between him and the scheduled date of his death. One month might not be enough time for Alabama lawmakers to enact protective measures to prevent a Wood-like miscarriage of justice from happening again. But there's still time left to save one man's life.

Petition: Stop the execution of Holly Woods, on 2nd September, 2010 by the state of Alabama
A plea to stop the execution of Holly Woods, a mentally disabled man,on 2nd September 2010, by the State of Alabama.

I understand that a date of 2nd September 2010 has been set for the judicial execution of Holly Woods, currently a prisoner at Holman Correctional Facility. I also understand that it is within your remit to show clemency to Holly and commute his sentence to life imprisonment.

I would like to appeal to you in the strongest possible terms to commute Holly’s sentence. As you are no doubt aware, Holly’s case is controversial: he has an IQ of 59, which clearly classes him as mentally retarded.

At his original trial his attorney (who was apparently a novice ) did not make the jurors aware of Holly’s mental capabilities, and this would clearly have had an impact on the outcome of the trial. The jurors voted 10-2 in favour of capital punishment, which is the smallest majority that can lead to capital punishment. If Holly’s mental condition was made known to the jurors then it is without doubt that one or more of them would have voted against capital punishment.

I do not wish to downplay the enormity or seriousness of Holly’s crime, but I would like to make two points: firstly, in the case of capital punishment I believe that the state cannot and should not move to end a man’s life unless it is absolutely clear that the punishment is warranted and justified. In Holly’s case, for the reasons outlined above, it is neither warranted nor justified. Secondly I cannot see how any sort of justice can be served by the judicial execution of a man as mentally retarded as Holly.

Petition: Save a Mentally Disabled Man from his September Execution

A fifty year old mentally challenged man sits on death row at Holman prison in Alabama. He awaits his execution, set for September 2 of this year. As the clock quickly ticks away what could be his final days, a rush is on to save him.

 There's no one questioning his guilt--he was found guilty of shooting an ex girlfriend. Despite the horrendous nature of his offense, however, people are pleading with the governor to grant him clemency. The reason? His defense attorney at trial never told jurors of his mental incompetency, a fact that would have likely swayed at least one juror--all that was needed to save him from death.

The case of Holly Wood serves as a grave example of the broken indigent defense system in this country. His court appointed attorneys were given a maximum $1,000 for their defense in his capital murder case, hardly incentive for doing a thorough job. Attorney Kenneth B. Trotter hadn't been practicing law a full year when he argued for leniency at Wood's sentencing. The result: a recommendation of death by a vote of 10 to 2, the absolute minimum required in Alabama for the death penalty. Had Trotter divulged Wood's mental status at the sentencing hearing, there's a high probability at least one of those jurors would have voted against the execution.

The United States Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that executing those deemed to be "mentally retarded" violated the Eight Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. That specific case, Atkins v. Virginia, involved a man with an IQ of 59. They stated that the execution of such adults served no reasonable purpose. The ruling recognized that although the mentally retarded may know the difference between right and wrong, they were often unable to learn from past mistakes, understand complex interpersonal relationships, and use logical reasoning as the rest of the population. 

Subsequently, many states enacted procedures safeguarding against the execution of those with similar mental statuses. Some had even banned such executions prior to the 2002 ruling. However, Alabama has enacted no such procedures nor have they attempted to define what would be considered "mentally retarded" and therefore covered under the Atkins case. 

Holly Wood has an IQ of 64. The state of Alabama recognizes an IQ score of 70 as being "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning." A competency report which was not used during the sentencing phase stated that he read at a third grade level and was in the "borderline range of intellectual functioning." None of this would have negated Wood's guilt but it could have and should have been used at sentencing to argue for leniency. 

Wood's case made it all the way to the Supreme Court where the justices upheld his conviction and sentence in a vote of 7 to 2. Their position was that the defense attorneys made a strategic decision, not an oversight, in the choice to not include information about his mental competency. Interestingly, however, they did not address the matter of his competency in relation to the Atkins v. Virginia case. Now, his only hope at relief lies in clemency granted by Governor Bob Riley.

Join other activists here at Change.org in requesting Governor Riley's mercy. The Governor is the only person who can now save Holly Wood's life. All other avenues have been exhausted and a little more than one month stands between his life and the scheduled date of his death. One month isn't enough time for Alabama lawmakers to enact protective measures to prevent this from happening again. But it is enough time to save one man's life. 

Greetings,

This letter is in regards to 50 year old Holly Wood, a mentally retarded man who sits on death row at Holman Correctional Facility. As I am sure you know, Mr. Wood is scheduled to die at the hands of the state on September 2. His only chance at reprieve lies with you. This isn't an effort to minimize his crime or argue his innocence. However, it is a request that you review his case in light of his mental competency and the Supreme Court case of Atkins v. Virginia.

The United States Supreme court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia (2002) that executing those deemed mentally retarded was in violation of the Eighth Amendment, protecting against cruel and unusual punishment. Holly Wood is said to have an IQ of 64, 6 points less than the score deemed by the state of Alabama as being "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning." He reads at a 3rd grade level and was said to function in a "borderline range" in his competency report, a report never shared with jurors at sentencing time.

Prior to the 2002 Atkins ruling, several states had already banned executions of the mentally disabled. Following the ruling, many more established procedures to help determine who actually qualified as "mentally retarded" and protect them against capital punishment. Despite the progressive actions of other state governments and a recommendation by the Alabama Court of Appeals, Alabama has yet to enact any such procedures or precautions.

Although the month of August doesn't allow enough time for Alabama lawmakers to write and enact legislation, it does allow time for you to review the case of Holly Wood and do what's right. I respectfully request you review Wood's case and grant him clemency before September 2, 2010.

Thank you for your timely action in this matter.

Contact Governor of Alabama Bob Riley
Greetings Governor Bob Riley, 
I urge you to stop the execution of 50 year old Holly Wood, scheduled for September 2nd in Alabama. This man received inadequate legal representation as one of his attorneys hadn't even been practicing law for a full year. Wood has an IQ of 64. The state of Alabama recognizes an IQ score of 70 as being "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning." Executing this mentally retarded man would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty for any individual is already considered inhumane, cruel, immoral and uncivilized but when a mentally impaired individual is executed, that is simply barbaric. The death penalty is revenge, not justice. Public safety can be accomplished through imprisonment. Holly Wood needs rehabilitation and the death penalty completely denies the possibility and opportunity for rehabilitation and self-improvement. The state of Alabama must enact procedures to safeguard against the execution of the mentally retarded. One report found that Wood read at a third grade level and was in borderline range of intellectual functioning. The result after the trial by the jury was a recommendation of death by a vote of 10 to 2, the absolute minimum required in Alabama for the death penalty. Had Wood's mental status been divulged at the sentencing hearing, there's a high probability at least one of those jurors would have voted against the execution. I urge you to please grant clemency and save Holly Wood's life.