Posted on 09/25/2007 4:27:30 PM PDT by Dubya
Death sentence appeal rejected
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal from a 28-year-old Honduran man who is scheduled to be executed next week for the 2001 robbery and fatal shooting of a south Arlington clothing store manager.
Heliberto Chi was sentenced to die Oct. 3 by lethal injection for robbing and killing Armand Paliotta, 56, at the K&G Men's Superstore in southwest Arlington.
The nation's highest court rejected claims by Chi’s court-appointed attorney, Wes Ball, that Chi was not allowed to contact his country's consular as prescribed by the Vienna Convention on Consular Rights. That 1963 treaty was meant to allow foreigners who are arrested the right to speak with their consulates.
"Nobody told Mr. Chi he had a right to a consular official, and it was never brought to his attention," Ball said.
Chi's appeals through the state and federal courts have been rejected. Death Row inmates often submit last-minute appeals despite earlier rulings by the courts.
Ball has also requested a 30-day reprieve from Gov. Rick Perry and asked that the governor commute the sentence. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles has made no recommendation on Chi’s case to Perry.
During his trial, Chi's attorneys claimed that he was questioned by deputies in Los Angeles without access to the Honduran consulate. But a Tarrant County state district court judge ruled that statements Chi made to police were admissible in court.
Chi was a former employee at the Arlington clothing store. Witnesses testified that he entered the store after it closed at 9 p.m., robbed the store and shot Paliotta in the back. Employee Adrian Riojas was also shot in the back but survived and testified that Chi was the shooter.
Chi has rejected several requests for an interview by the Star-Telegram.
I love it down here. I came from New Jersey. San Antonio boy now.
Great place, Great people, Great job.
One point I will concede is that defendants do need to be able to introduce DNA evidence from convictions that were obtained back before it was available at trial. The courts have made that difficult, and that is a shame. But here, we are talking about a crime committed 7 years after the OJ case, where DNA evidence was used in court. So on appeal (or a writ) he would need to introduce NEW evidence that was not available at trial.
That sounds like a positive turn of events. I would hope your state only executes the guilty.
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.