Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019 | View Entire Issue (May 17, 2000)
4 WEdNEsdAy, M ay 17, 2000 TM e CI ac I camas P rint Session: Death penalty cases argued on campus Continued from page 1 to by the treaty. To remedy this oversight, Groom advocated suppression of statements Reyes-Camarena made without benefit of this counsel. The state argued that this was not an ap propriate remedy. “Suppression isn’t the [estab lished] remedy for violation of the treaty,” said State Attorney Robert B. Rocklin. The second assignment of er ror Groom presented was against the constitutionality of the death penalty itself. The cases the Su preme Court hears are important because they are not only appli cable to the individual cases they concern, but they also become precedents that future cases are argued upon. This case is impor tant because it will define the way the Oregon Supreme Court inter prets the death penalty statute as laid out by the legislature. “I am arguing that the present death penalty scheme is uncon- stitutional,” Groom said. “There needs to be a central stor age point for who gets the death penalty.” Justice Van Hoomissen re sponded with an other question. “What’s our authority to tell the legislature how to do busi ness unless we tell them that what they’ve done is unconstitu tional?” he asked, after considerable debate on the subject. Justice Gillette stated that to find the death penalty unconstitutional, What's our author ity to tell the legis lature how to do business unless we tell them that what they've done is unconstitutional? George Van Hoomissen Supreme Court Justice there would need to be some federal basis for it. The point was also raised by Justice Van Hoomissen that there is a big dif ference in the way the death pen alty is assigned from county to county. One District Attorney may ask for it when another may not. “How can it be,” Justice Van Hoomissen asked, “that one per son from Lane County kills five people and gets life in prison, while one from Douglas County kills one and gets death? How can that be permissible?” Following discussion related to the second case, Chief Justice Carson invited questions from the audience. The first was in regard to what happens after the court hears arguments such as those presented today. Justice Leeson explained that af ter the Supreme Court hears oral ar guments in a case, one Justice is assigned to write a draft of conclu sion agreeable to all the Justices. “These cases are not resolved quickly," said Justice Leeson. "The last word will be a written word and not a spoken word.” She explained that the justices work toward con sensus, but it is extremely difficult to come up with a written decision that all members of the court will agree to. “When it’s reduced to writing, therein lies the problem,” she said. “However, I do admire the extent to which my colleagues strive for con sensus." Concerning today’s case, if the court rilles that there were errors made in Reyes- Camarena’s trial, the death sentence could be vacated and the trial re manded to a trial court for further ac tion. This is similar to the automatic re view of sentence of death that the court ruled on earlier this month, State v. Day ton LeRoy Rogers. The Supreme Court regularly vis its high schools to raise awareness about what the court does by hearing ar guments there - but this year they were invited to Clackamas thanks in part to fac ulty member Linda Durham, wife of Su preme Court Justice Robert (Skip) D. Durham. “The justices visit schools so stu dents have an opportunity to see the court in action rather than just read about it in a text book,” Linda Durham said. She added that being a justice in volves research into cases that uses up much of her husband’s free time, including nights and weekends. Following hearing of the cases, the justices had lunch in the com munity center and were joined by several students, faculty members and administrators. 1 fclÆKilHlBlig1 1 (îg -î w 1«-ï| 1 ■ 1* »»ili »»M PHOTOS BY MIKE POLLOCK Attorneys Janet A. Metcalf (Left), and Kathleen M. Correll (Right) argue the case of State vs. Brownhill in front of the Oregon Supreme Court (above) Tuesday. 5th Annual Environmental Week Friday May 19th Wednesday May 24th • Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle R u m - • HEEL Bar-B-Que 11 a.m.-lp.m. mage Sale hosted by Phi Theta Kappa in the Community Center. 9 a.m.-3 p.m. • Life for a Life Presentation CC 127 11:30a.m.-12 p.m. • Ron Tonkin Electric Bikes Saturday May 20th • Newell Creek Watershed Volunteer Project sponsored by Phi Theta Kappa & HEEL. • Native Plant Sale @ John Inskeep Envi ronmental Learning Center. • ELCTours Band: W.W.W.D. Jazz Ensemble Thursday May 25th FOOD & PHARMACY 19701 Highway 213, across from Clackamas Community College • Hawk Haven Special Presentation, Sky Sandwiches • Orient Express • Chef’s Counter Scratch Bakery • Stone Fired Pizza • Floral light Dining Room 11a.m.-12 p.m. Band: Mainstream Jazz Monday May 22nd • Native American Drum Entrance 11 a.m. • Ron Tonkin Electric Bikes • ELCTours Friday May 26th • Lost Forest Field Trip Life Sciences Department • Pacific Green Party Band: High Desert Surf • Environmental Fun ¿¿Games for Kids Tuesday May 23rd @ELC Band: The Sugar Daddies • NW Steelheaders • Metro Composting Workshop Saturday May 27th Band: You Sink My Battleship! • Native American Pow- Wow Randall Gym 12.-7p.rn. For more info, about Environmental week contact Ken Eshelman at 657-6958 ext. 2245. • Channel Light Band @ Community Center Courtyard 12p.m.-lp.m. 100 OFF A With Voucher and C.A.R.D.® Stone Fired Pizza Slice 1 > r 1 • qr-'l • Regular $2.99 • Must present Voucher and Haggen C.A.R.D.® • Valid. May 17-23, Oregon City Haggen only. ■
