Ground Rules for Death Penalty Review Decided by the NH Supreme Court Today

The NH Supreme Court just issued a decision in the Addison death penalty case. There are many parts to the appeal of the Addison conviction and sentence of death. This decision focused on what is called “proportionality review.” Proportionality review requires the state Supreme Court to be the last body to review a sentence of death for overall fairness and to make sure the sentence is not aberrational or influenced by an arbitrary factor, like race. This decision set the ground rules for consideration of the Addison sentence and of all death sentences that may be imposed in the future.

The Court acknowledged its responsibility to determine if a death sentence is proportional, but so circumscribed its review as to render it potentially meaningless. The decision for example would prevent the Court from considering if the death sentence imposed on Addison, a young African American who killed a police officer, is disproportionate to the life sentence imposed on Jay Brooks, a wealthy white businessman who ordered a brutal, planned murder for hire.

The Court also said it can only consider cases in which the defendant went through a capital sentencing proceeding. This means it cannot consider the prosecutor’s charging decision. The Court will not consider whether there is any arbitrariness in one prosecutor trying to send an eligible defendant to death while deciding to forego the death penalty in another case that may have occurred on her watch.

The State will argue that its decision puts NH in the main stream of death penalty jurisprudence. While this is right, it puts us right in line with Georgia and Mississippi. I do not believe that this is where we want to be, main stream or not.