Given the bad news we just received regarding the Third Circuit's refusal to reconsider Mumia's appeal, and the limited legal options now open to him, we have decided to call this open meeting for all interested and able to come. We know it is very short notice but Attorney Soffiyah Elija, who is one of Mumia's attorneys at this stage of the proceedings and who just visited Mumia this past Monday, is only available this Friday.
So join us to better understand the legal situation and to plan our next steps of RESISTANCE!
PLACE: St. Mary's Church basement
521 West 126th Street
TIME: 6:30 PM
We will have very light refreshments. Feel free to bring food.
Hope to see you on Friday.
ONA MOVE!
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Legal Update from Mumia's Attorney
July 22, 2008
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Federal ruling regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row, Pennsylvania
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia
Today our Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Simply put, we did not receive the needed majority vote from the nine sitting judges; at least five votes for a rehearing were necessary. However, Justice Thomas L. Ambro continues to urge the granting of relief on the issue of racism in jury selection. That position, as detailed in his brilliant dissenting opinion of March 27, 2008, will continue to serve as a beacon of hope as we press on for a new trial and Mumia's freedom. Judge Ambro said that the "core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race. . . . I respectfully dissent." A copy of today's decision is attached.
Reaction Mumia and I had a legal conference this afternoon. He, as I, was stunned by the federal court's refusal to grant relief since it flies in the face of established legal precedent in both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. I am furious because racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system. The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case, and that bigotry lingers today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realize that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice.
U.S. Supreme Court We will be seeking relief in the Supreme Court. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari will be filed by October 20, 2008, unless there is an extension. The racism issue will be presented, along with the fact that the prosecutor made misrepresentations to the jury in order to obtain a murder conviction against Mumia.
Conclusion My goal remains a complete reversal of the conviction, even though the federal court has already granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty. We will not rest until Mumia is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
*As to panel rehearing only.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Nos. 01-9014 & 02-9001
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL,
a/k/a WESLEY COOK
Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Appellant at No 02-9001
v.
MARTIN HORN,
PENNSYLVANIA DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS;
CONNER BLAINE, SUPERINTENDENT, SCI GREENE;
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR PHILADELPHIA COUNTY;
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellants at No. 01-9014
(D.C. Civ. No. 99-cv-5089)
SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
Present: SCIRICA, Chief Judge,
SLOVITER, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH,
CHAGARES, JORDAN, HARDIMAN and COWEN*, Circuit Judges.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellee/cross-appellant Mumia Abu-Jamal in the above-entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular service not having voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing by the panel and the Court en banc, is denied. Judge Ambro would grant rehearing en banc.
BY THE COURT,
/s/ Anthony J. Scirica
Chief Judge
Dated: July 22, 2008
CMD/cc: Robert R. Bryan, Esq.
Judith L. Ritter, Esq.
Hugh J. Burns, Jr., Esq.
Ronald Eisenberg, Esq.
Christina Swarns, Esq.
Jill Elijah, Esq.
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Federal ruling regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row, Pennsylvania
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia
Today our Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Simply put, we did not receive the needed majority vote from the nine sitting judges; at least five votes for a rehearing were necessary. However, Justice Thomas L. Ambro continues to urge the granting of relief on the issue of racism in jury selection. That position, as detailed in his brilliant dissenting opinion of March 27, 2008, will continue to serve as a beacon of hope as we press on for a new trial and Mumia's freedom. Judge Ambro said that the "core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race. . . . I respectfully dissent." A copy of today's decision is attached.
Reaction Mumia and I had a legal conference this afternoon. He, as I, was stunned by the federal court's refusal to grant relief since it flies in the face of established legal precedent in both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. I am furious because racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system. The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case, and that bigotry lingers today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realize that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice.
U.S. Supreme Court We will be seeking relief in the Supreme Court. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari will be filed by October 20, 2008, unless there is an extension. The racism issue will be presented, along with the fact that the prosecutor made misrepresentations to the jury in order to obtain a murder conviction against Mumia.
Conclusion My goal remains a complete reversal of the conviction, even though the federal court has already granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty. We will not rest until Mumia is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
*As to panel rehearing only.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Nos. 01-9014 & 02-9001
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL,
a/k/a WESLEY COOK
Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Appellant at No 02-9001
v.
MARTIN HORN,
PENNSYLVANIA DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS;
CONNER BLAINE, SUPERINTENDENT, SCI GREENE;
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR PHILADELPHIA COUNTY;
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellants at No. 01-9014
(D.C. Civ. No. 99-cv-5089)
SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
Present: SCIRICA, Chief Judge,
SLOVITER, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH,
CHAGARES, JORDAN, HARDIMAN and COWEN*, Circuit Judges.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellee/cross-appellant Mumia Abu-Jamal in the above-entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular service not having voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing by the panel and the Court en banc, is denied. Judge Ambro would grant rehearing en banc.
BY THE COURT,
/s/ Anthony J. Scirica
Chief Judge
Dated: July 22, 2008
CMD/cc: Robert R. Bryan, Esq.
Judith L. Ritter, Esq.
Hugh J. Burns, Jr., Esq.
Ronald Eisenberg, Esq.
Christina Swarns, Esq.
Jill Elijah, Esq.
Abu-Jamal loses latest appeal for new trial
By Emilie Lounsberry
Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted on Tue, Jul. 22, 2008:
A federal appeals court yesterday refused to reconsider the decision denying a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the 1981 murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In a two-page decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Abu-Jamal's request for a rehearing of his appeal in the controversial case, which has helped fuel an international debate about the death penalty.
Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said he planned to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case.
In March, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
Deputy District Attorney Ronald Eisenberg said no decision had been made on whether his office would ask the high court to reinstate the death sentence.
Abu-Jamal and his lawyers contend that the panel should have ordered a hearing on their contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, though he was in the minority on that issue.
All three members of the panel, which also included Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica and Judge Robert E. Cowen, affirmed the December 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who threw out the death sentence.
Yohn concluded that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
He found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded the jury to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early on Dec. 9, 1981.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals.
Unless the nation's high court agrees to hear the case, Abu-Jamal most likely would face a new Philadelphia jury to decide only whether the penalty should be life or death. The high court hears only a tiny percentage of all petitions filed each year.
Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 215-854-4828 or elounsberry@phillynews.com
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080722_Abu-Jamal_loses_latest_appeal_for_new_trial.html
Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted on Tue, Jul. 22, 2008:
A federal appeals court yesterday refused to reconsider the decision denying a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the 1981 murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In a two-page decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Abu-Jamal's request for a rehearing of his appeal in the controversial case, which has helped fuel an international debate about the death penalty.
Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said he planned to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case.
In March, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
Deputy District Attorney Ronald Eisenberg said no decision had been made on whether his office would ask the high court to reinstate the death sentence.
Abu-Jamal and his lawyers contend that the panel should have ordered a hearing on their contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, though he was in the minority on that issue.
All three members of the panel, which also included Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica and Judge Robert E. Cowen, affirmed the December 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who threw out the death sentence.
Yohn concluded that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
He found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded the jury to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early on Dec. 9, 1981.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals.
Unless the nation's high court agrees to hear the case, Abu-Jamal most likely would face a new Philadelphia jury to decide only whether the penalty should be life or death. The high court hears only a tiny percentage of all petitions filed each year.
Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 215-854-4828 or elounsberry@phillynews.com
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080722_Abu-Jamal_loses_latest_appeal_for_new_trial.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)