Texas appeals court halts execution of man who did not kill anyone

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Friday halted an execution planned for next week of a man convicted as an accomplice to a murder he did not commit in a case that raised questions about how the state applies the death penalty.

Jeffery Wood, 43, was scheduled to be executed on Aug. 24 by lethal injection. He was convicted of taking part in a 1996 convenience store robbery during which clerk Kriss Keeran was fatally shot.

In its decision, the appeals court asked a lower court to review his sentence and claims from Wood's lawyer that it was obtained in violation of due process because it was based on false testimony and false scientific evidence.

The concept behind the Texas "law of parties" originated in common law where it is known as felony murder and appears under that name in most states. In many instances, without such a rule, no one could be charged with murder because the evidence is not sufficiently clear as to who pulled the trigger or delivered the fatal blow in a beating. Or, in other instances, the defendant claims that the gun went off accidentally when the defendant tried to grab it.

At heart, the principle of the felony murder rule is that when one sets out to commit a major violent crime and murder ensues while doing so, the killer and anyone else involved in the crime can be charged with that murder even if no one specifically intended to kill. As one might surmise, robbery-murder and gang related assaults and street killings are the most frequent source of such charges.

Notably, the death penalty for the crime of felony murder squares with the Constitution. The Supreme Court has held that the death penalty may be imposed on someone who was a participant in a violent felony and who acted with reckless indifference to human life. Planning and providing backup for the armed robbery of a gas station fits the bill even if, as is claimed here, the defendant is outside when it occurs.

Contrary to Reuters' account in the article posted, Jeffrey Wood was deeply involved in the robbery. As recounted by the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2001 in a case involving the shooter, a man named Reneau:

“Over the course of approximately two weeks in December 1995, Reneau and Jeffrey Wood, who resided together with their girlfriends, made plans to rob a gas station located near their home. Initially, Wood and Reneau believed that they had convinced Kris Keeran and William Bunker, who worked as cashiers at the gas station, to participate in the robbery. Keeran and Bunker soon made clear, however, that they would not provide any assistance. Nevertheless, Wood and Reneau decided to carry out the robbery on their own."

"Early in the morning of January 2, 1996, Reneau entered the gas station with a gun in his hand while Wood waited outside. Reneau pointed the gun at Keeran, who was standing behind the counter, and told Keeran to go into a back office. Keeran did not move, and Reneau shot him in the head. Proceeding with the robbery, Reneau went into the back office and took a safe. Wood, who had entered the gas station after Reneau fired the gun, removed a box of cash and a videocassette recorder containing a surveillance tape. They loaded the three items onto the truck that they had driven to the gas station and left. Keeran died almost instantaneously.”

In sum, both on the law and the facts, the Wood case is far different than what Reuters reported based on the false claims of his lawyers. I suggest that, on balance, Jeffrey Wood is a poor choice on whom to confer sympathy as a supposed victim of injustice.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.