Printer Friendly Version
 Anzel Jones
Juvenile Offender in Texas
Execution Date: April 29, 2004
Update: Granted a stay of execution by the US Supreme Court pending a decision in Simmons.
Anzel Jones, an African American, was 17 years of age at the time of his arrest for the May 2, 1995 murder of Sherry Jones.
Facts of The Case
Anzel Jones, an African American male, was 17 years old when he was arrested in May 1995 for the murder of Sherry Jones. On May 2, 1995, Anzel Jones broke into the Texas home of Sherry Jones (no relationship) and her mother, Edith. While Edith Jones was locked in the bedroom, Anzel Jones apparently stabbed Sherry Jones in the chest, and cut her throat (Anzel Jones was possibly accompanied by another man). As Edith Jones came out of the bedroom, Anzel Jones sexually assaulted her and cut her throat. The house was then set on fire, but Edith Jones survived and testified against Anzel Jones. Edith’s daughter, Sherry Jones, died. Anzel Jones was charged with capital murder on June 27, 1995. He was convicted as charged and sentenced to death on June 3, 1996. An execution date has been set for April 29, 2004.
The Trial
Anzel Jones was charged with capital murder on June 27, 1995. He was convicted as charged and sentenced to death on June 3, 1996.
While the physical evidence that Jones was the assailant of Edith was overwhelming, the physical evidence linking him to the murder of Sherry was not as strong. However Jones’ best friend, Joe Dollins, testified that Jones confessed to him that he had committed the crime against Edith and Sherry Jones.
It is argued that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance:
- In an attempt to impeach Joe Dollins, Jones’ best friend, counsel asked him an open-ended question about why he was testifying that Jones had confessed to him when he had previously told the police he knew nothing about the crime. Dollins responded that he changed his story because the police found a letter that he had written to Jones confirming a plan he and Jones had developed for Jones to kill Dollins’ father and brother. Faced with the threat of prosecution for this conspiracy, Dollins testified that he stopped trying to protect Jones and told the police what he knew. It is argued that counsel provided ineffective assistance by asking this open-ended question because it led to Dollins’ testimony that he and Jones had conspired to kill Dollins’ father and brother. With this evidence, the jury’s doubt about whether Jones killed Sherry diminished.
- Counsel also was ineffective in pursuing evidence of Jones’ brain damage. There were a number of signs that Jones suffered from brain dysfunction or organic brain damage. With effective pursuit of the evidence of Jones’ brain damage, there would have been a reasonable likelihood of persuading the jury to sentence Jones to life instead of death.
Deprivation of Eighth Amendment Right: Prosecution penalty phase witness Royce Smithey’s testimony stating that Jones might be able to escape from the confines of prison if he were not sentenced to death deprived Jones of his Eighth Amendment right to an individualized sentencing determination, since the possibility of escape exists for all offenders.
Violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments’ Safeguards Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The prosecutorial decision to seek the death penalty against Jones for a crime he committed at the age of 17, without first determining whether he was sufficiently mature to prosecute as an adult, violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments’ Safeguards Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment.
Current Status
Jones still resides on Texas’ death row. He is currently awaiting the decision of the United States Supreme Court on his petition for writ of certiorari at the end of federal habeas corpus proceedings He has raised two issues in his petition: the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment for a person who was only seventeen years old at the time of the capital offense, and the Texas system for habeas corpus review is “ineffective,” thus excusing prisoners from the requirement of presenting all their claims to the state courts in order to gain review in the federal courts, because the state habeas process in Texas recognizes the need for counsel but refuses to require that counsel appointed for condemned state habeas applicants provide adequate assistance.
Executing Juvenile Offenders is Contrary to International Law
The execution of child offenders is in contravention of international law and fundamental standards of human rights. The ultimate goal of the international community is to abolish the death penalty under all circumstances, however, until that time there are restrictions on the categories of persons who can be executed, juveniles being one of the restricted categories. The prohibition of the execution of juveniles is referenced in a number of international treaties, declarations, and statements by international bodies, in addition to the laws of the majority of nations. Please refer to the International Instruments section, for more explanations of juvenile offenders and international law.
Juvenile Offenders: Issues of Mitigation
The IJP offers overviews on brain development and trauma as possible mitigation factors for juvenile offenders.
|
