Justice should always be available to those wrongly convicted

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
[link removed]



** For Immediate Release: July 23, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------


** Rutherford Institute Calls on U.S. Supreme Court to Apply Unanimous Jury Rule Retroactively to All Convictions That Violate the Sixth Amendment
------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Fighting to ensure that no one is imprisoned in violation of their constitutional rights, The Rutherford Institute is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow persons convicted by non-unanimous juries to challenge those convictions ([link removed]) under the Court’s recent ruling that the Sixth Amendment requires all jurors vote to convict a criminal defendant. In an amicus curiae brief filed with the Supreme Court in Edwards v. Vannoy ([link removed]) , the Institute has joined a coalition of civil liberties organizations in asking that the Court’s ruling in ([link removed]) Ramos v. Louisiana
([link removed]) striking down state laws allowing non-unanimous convictions be applied retroactively to persons whose convictions became final before the Ramos ruling. The Rutherford Institute and its coalition partners argue that jury unanimity is a fundamental constitutional right, and no person should be imprisoned without the assurances of guilt provided by a unanimous jury verdict.

“Justice should always be available to those wrongly convicted,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People ([link removed]) . “Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the right to a unanimous jury verdict is firmly rooted in America’s history and fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty. This fundamental right must apply to all imprisoned persons, regardless of when they were convicted.”
EXTENDED DEADLINE! DOUBLE THE IMPACT OF YOUR DONATION BEFORE AUG. 15: $125,000 MATCHING GIFT CAMPAIGN. CLICK HERE TO MAKE A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE DONATION ([link removed])

In 2006, Thedrick Edwards, a 19-year old black man, became a suspect in a series of crimes that occurred in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Police searched Edward’s residence, but found nothing connecting him with the crimes. Upon learning of the search, Edwards surrendered to police, who interrogated him numerous times over several days. Edwards consistently told police he was not involved in the crimes. Police then chained Edwards to a wall and, according to Edwards, used force to coerce him into waiving his right to counsel and confessing. He was charged with multiple counts of robbery and rape. In addition to denying Edwards’ motion to suppress his confession, the trial court allowed the prosecution to use its challenges to potential jurors against blacks, so that only one black woman was on Edwards’ jury. At trial, the prosecution produced no physical evidence connecting Edwards to the crimes, and only one of five eyewitnesses identified Edwards. He was convicted of all charges, even
though the black juror voted to acquit on each charge. At that time, all states except Louisiana and Oregon required jury verdicts supporting criminal convictions be unanimous. His final appeal in the state courts was denied in 2011. Edwards then filed a federal habeas corpus petition raising a Sixth Amendment challenge to the non-unanimous verdicts, but the federal courts denied the petition.

Edwards petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review his case, and while that petition was pending, the Court issued its ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana ([link removed]) that a “trial by an impartial jury” guaranteed by the constitution includes the requirement that a jury reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict. Edwards argued that the court should apply the ruling in Ramos to his case even though Ramos was issued after his conviction became final. In their amicus brief ([link removed]) , The Rutherford Institute and its coalition partners argue Ramos should apply to Edwards’ case because the right to a unanimous jury is not new, has been recognized for more than a century and is a watershed rule of criminal procedure entitled to retroactive application.

The amicus brief ([link removed]) of The Rutherford Institute, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Conservative Union Foundation, Cato Institute and R Street Institute is available at www.rutherford.org. ([link removed] amicus brief of The Rutherford Institute, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Conservative Union Foundation, Cato Institute and R Street Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.)

This press release is also available at www.rutherford.org ([link removed]) .

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.

Source: [link removed]
MAKE THE GOVERNMENT PLAY BY THE RULES OF THE CONSTITUTION: SUPPORT THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM ([link removed])

To donate via PayPal, please click below:
[link removed]
[link removed] Share ([link removed])
[link removed] https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fjustice-for-all-us-supreme-court-should-apply-unanimous-jury-rule-retroactively-to-all-convictions-that-violate-the-sixth-amendment Tweet ([link removed] https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fjustice-for-all-us-supreme-court-should-apply-unanimous-jury-rule-retroactively-to-all-convictions-that-violate-the-sixth-amendment)
[link removed] Forward ([link removed])

============================================================
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
CONTACT INFORMATION
Nisha Whitehead
(434) 978-3888 ext. 604
** [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE
Post Office Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Phone: (434) 978-3888
** www.rutherford.org ([link removed])

Copyright © 2020 The Rutherford Institute, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because of your interest in the work of The Rutherford Institute. Founded in 1982 by constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute is a civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated. To discontinue your membership electronically, or if you feel you are receiving this message in error, please follow the link below.

Under the regulations of the United States Internal Revenue Service, The Rutherford Institute is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) tax exempt nonprofit organization. Donations to support The Rutherford Institute’s legal and educational work help to safeguard the constitutional rights of all Americans. Donations are tax-deductible. In compliance with general industry standards of a nonprofit organization, the Institute is audited annually by an independent accounting firm.

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])

** update subscription preferences ([link removed])