Osvaldo Torres
Foreign National
Mexico
Oklahoma
Execution: Court grants indefinite stay, Governor subsequently commutes death sentence.
Case Overview
Briefs, Petitions, etc.
Letters Asking form Clemency
News
Clemency Information
More Information on Mexico and the International Court of Justice
Case Overview
Osvaldo Torres was arrested for the burglary and murder of Francisco Morales and his wife Maria Yanez. Mr. Morales and his wife were shot early in the morning on July 12, 1993. The sound of gunfire awoke the two children in the house, Yanez’s daughter Christina and Mr. Morales’ son, Francisco. Christina Yanez saw and was able to identify Torres and his accomplice Jorge Ochoa. Christina Yanez then called 911. As the police were responding to the 911 call, officers arrested Torres and Ochoa a short distance from the crime scene. The case was tried under the theory that Torres aided and abetted in the commission of the crimes and that Ochoa was most likely the triggerman. A jury found Torres guilty and sentenced him to death.
When arrested, Torres was not notified of his right, under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations ( VCCR), to contact the Mexican consulate. In November 1999, the US Supreme Court denied cert to Torres’ claim of a VCCR violation. However, Justices Stephens and Breyer dissented. Breyer cautioned that the case may have "international implications" and affect the United States’ relationship with Mexico and other countries, or could affect how U.S. citizens are treated overseas. Currently, the International Court of Justice is deliberating Mexico’s claim of consular notification violation in Avena and other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America). For more information about this case, please click here.
Letters Asking for Clemency
Briefs, Petitions, etc.
November 17, 2004 – US Supreme Court denies cert in Torres v. Mullin, Justices Stephens and Breyer dissenting.
News
- May 13 2004 - Following the recommendation of the Board of Pardon and Paroles, Governor Brad Henry commuted the death sentence of Osvaldo Torres. Click here for the Governor's press release.
- On May 13 2004, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, in a 3-2 decision, granted an indefinite stay of execution for Osvaldo Torres. The Court ordered an evidentiary hearing in the District Court on two issues, namely: whether Torres was prejudiced by the state's violation of his rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in failing to inform him, after he was detained, that he had the right to contact the Mexican consulate and whether he had ineffective counsel.
- May 11, 2004 - Osvaldo Torres: Clemency Rare in Oklahoma.
- The Ambassador of Mexico to the United States, Carlos De Icaza, made representations to the Oklahoma Board of Pardons and Paroles regarding the case of Osvaldo Torres. Please click here for statement.
- May 7, 2004 - The Oklahoma Board of Pardon and Parole, in a 3-2 vote, has recommended that clemency be granted to Osvaldo Torres. This will now go to Governor Brad Henry for consideration.
- An oral clemency hearing will be held by the Oklahoma Board of Pardon and Paroles on Friday, 7 May 2004 at 10am local time.
- March 31, 2004 -International Court of Justice Says U.S. Violated Mexicans' Rights
Click here to see the ICJ's page on Mexico v. United States of America including the decision.
- March 2, 2004 - Court slates Torres’ execution
Oklahoma: Clemency rare in Oklahoma
In the 14 years since Oklahoma reinstated the death penalty, only 1 death
row inmate has been spared by clemency. Attorneys for Osbaldo Torres, a
Mexican national condemned to die, are pressing their case to halt his
execution next week, but it is still uncertain how Gov. Brad Henry will
rule.
As of Monday, Henry had not acted on the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole
Board's recommendation of clemency for Torres. The panel voted 3-2 on
Friday to spare Torres, who was convicted of killing an Oklahoma City
couple in 1993.
Henry could decide to alter Torres' sentence or allow the May 18
execution. Since taking office in January 2003, Henry has rejected all 3
recommendations for clemency he has received. His record falls in line
with previous Oklahoma governors.
The appointed board has heard 54 requests for clemency since it began
hearings in 1992. It has recommended clemency in 8 cases. Only 1 of the
board's recommendations has been approved by the governor -- the
suggestion 3 years ago that Gov. Frank Keating spare Phillip DeWitt Smith.
Keating, a former federal prosecutor, said in April 2001 he could not,
without a doubt, say Smith killed Matthew Taylor in 1983 in Muskogee.
Smith's sentence was reduced to life in prison.
Henry's decision in the Torres case could have international bearing.
On Monday, Mexican officials said President Vicente Fox and Foreign
Relations Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez sent letters to Henry urging
clemency for Torres. An ambassador and four members of the Mexican Senate
came to Torres' clemency hearing last week.
Legal experts, former diplomats and more than a dozen organizations --
including Amnesty International -- have also fought on behalf of Torres,
who has ongoing appeals in the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.
Experts argue that Americans arrested on foreign soil could be put in
jeopardy if claims that Torres was denied his rights guaranteed by the
Vienna Convention are ignored.
Torres is one of 51 Mexicans on death row across the country whose rights
were violated because they were not told they could receive help from
their governments as guaranteed by the 1963 Vienna Convention, according
to a March 31 ruling by the International Court of Justice in The Hague,
Netherlands.
Torres is the 1st Mexican death row inmate to request relief under the
world court's ruling. Arizona, Arkansas, California, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon
and Texas also have condemned Mexican inmates who fall under the ruling.
Attorneys with the Oklahoma attorney general's office say they aren't
bound by the international court ruling.
"It certainly has become something that over the last several years has
given rise to concerns," said Peter Krug, a professor of international law
in University of Oklahoma law school. "This is really uncharted
territory."
Torres, 29, and another man were sentenced to death for the murders of
Francisco Morales, 38 and Maria Yanez, 35, who were shot to death in their
Oklahoma City home. Torres has said that he had no part in the killings.
Torres told the clemency board he did not know his co-defendant, George
Ochoa, had planned to kill the couple.
Mexico's ambassador to the United States, Carlos de Icaza, testified at
Friday's hearing that Torres' defense in his two trials did not benefit
from the legal and financial aid his country could have provided.
Torres' parents, who came to the United States illegally in the 1980s,
paid for his legal defense with money saved from their modest jobs.
"There are strong factors that militate toward clemency, including
evidence that is somewhat wanting on the issue of who killed the victims,"
said Arthur LeFrancois, a professor at Oklahoma City University's law
school. "There's no indication that Mr. Torres was the killer."
Torres' 1st murder trial ended with a hung jury.
Evidence in Torres' case, like Smith's case, has been called into
question. In both cases, physical evidence was weak and witnesses recanted
testimony linking the men to the crimes.
In Torres' case, fired police chemist Joyce Gilchrist testified that blood
on Torres' shirt was consistent with his blood or that of Ochoa or
Morales. However, when defense attorneys later asked for samples of the
blood and clothing for DNA testing, the evidence could not be found.
(source: Shawnee News-Star, May 11 2004)
Remarks from the Ambassador of Mexico, Carlos De Icaza, before the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board, regarding the case of Osbaldo Netzahualcoyotl Torres Aguilera:
INTRODUCTION
Madam Chair and Members of the Board,
Good Morning. Before I begin, I would like to thank each of you for your
willingness to hear the views of the Government of Mexico regarding the
impending execution of Osbaldo Torres Aguilera. I am deeply honored to
appear before this Board, and I hope that my comments will be useful for you
during your deliberations at the end of this hearing.
With me today are distinguished lawmakers, like the President of the
Committee for Foreign Relations of the Mexican Senate, a representative of
the State of Nuevo Leon, Mr. Torres' home State, and officials of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We are all here to convey our strong support
for the clemency petition filed by Mr. Torres. Mexico cares deeply about the
fate of Mr. Torres, and the number of dignitaries present in this room
illustrates the importance of this case to my Government.
The reason that I am here with you today, is because my Government considers
this to be an extraordinary case for clemency.
I recognize that Mr. Torres was convicted of participating in a crime that
resulted in the deaths of two innocent victims, one of whom was a Mexican
national. To the friends and family members of the victims, I would like to
express my deep sympathy and sincere condolences. By appearing here today, I
do not wish to convey the impression that my country is indifferent to their
suffering. Neither does Mexico condone crime.
Nevertheless, we strongly believe that commutation of Mr. Torres' death
sentence is warranted for both legal and humanitarian reasons. My remarks
here will focus on two of these reasons.
OSBALDO TORRES DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME THAT JUSTIFIES THE IMPOSITION OF THE
DEATH PENALTY
First of all, I would like to address Mexico's concern that the imposition
of the death penalty in this case is unjustified, in light of the fact that
Mr. Torres did not participate in the homicides. We are also not aware of
any evidence that he was involved in planning the homicides, or that he
harmed the victims in any way.
Mexico is opposed to the death penalty as a matter of principle, but we
recognize that other nations are entitled to impose that penalty in
accordance with their laws. Therefore, I would like to stress that we fully
respect the laws of Oklahoma and those of the United States. The execution
of Mr. Torres, however, does not appear to be consistent with this nation's
legal standard of executing only those offenders who have committed the most
serious crimes.
VIOLATION OF THE VIENNA CONVENTION
As for the second reason why commutation should be recommended, I would like
to express that my Government is deeply troubled that the authorities that
arrested Mr. Torres, failed to notify him of his right to seek assistance of
Mexican consular officials upon his arrest. Mr. Torres was arrested in July
1993, and was subjected to two separate trials over the next three years. At
no time, during this entire period, was Mr. Torres aware of his rights under
Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Mexican consular
officials were likewise unaware of Mr. Torres' detention. Indeed, they did
not learn of Mr. Torres' plight until 1997, fully four years after his
arrest, and more than a year after his death sentence was imposed. Even
then, notification came not from the officials who carried out the arrest,
but rather from Mr. Torres' own family members.
The Government of the United States provides full consular assistance to its
citizens worldwide. As the Legal Adviser of the U.S. Department of State
informed in a letter addressed to the Board, this provision of the Vienna
Convention is not only of importance to foreign nationals in the United
States, but it also serves to protect all American citizens who travel or
live abroad. In the same manner, the Government of Mexico is committed to
providing its own nationals abroad with timely and effective consular
assistance. Our ability to provide that indispensable support depends on
local compliance with the rights of consular information, notification and
access enshrined in Article 36.
As the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs has also explained in his letter
to the Board, the violation of the Vienna Convention had a devastating
impact on the fairness of the proceedings in Mr. Torres' case. Had Mexican
Consular officials been notified in a timely manner of his arrest, the
outcome of his trial would have been different. Later this morning, our
Legal Counsel Ms. Babcock will describe in more detail the ways in which
consular assistance could have affected the outcome of Mr. Torres' trial.
On March 31, 2004, the International Court of Justice issued a historic
judgment in a case brought by Mexico on behalf of Mr. Torres and 51 other
Mexican nationals sentenced to death. You have received a copy of this
decision that reflects international law, and I will not describe the
Court's opinion in any detail. But it is important to observe that of the 52
nationals whose cases were considered by the World Court, there were only
three in which the Court found that the United States violated every one of
its obligations under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. One of those
three nationals was Mr. Torres.
The Court found that Mr. Torres was denied his right to be informed without
delay that he could have his consulate notified of his arrest. Second,
Mexican officials were deprived of the right to communicate with and visit
Mr. Torres. Third, Mexico was deprived of its right to arrange for Mr.
Torres' legal representation. And finally, the United States violated its
obligation to provide judicial review of these violations.
The International Court of Justice called upon the United States courts to
review these violations and consider their effects. Nevertheless, we cannot
be certain that the courts will fulfill this obligation in the case of Mr.
Torres. To date, the courts have applied procedural default doctrines to
deny consideration of the Vienna Convention violation in his case. Perhaps
for this reason, the International Court of Justice stated that clemency
proceedings could "supplement" judicial review in Mr. Torres' case. Indeed,
the World Court observed that clemency is the "historic remedy for
preventing miscarriages of justice where the judicial process has been
exhausted."
CONCLUSION
In light of all these considerations, the Government of Mexico
wholeheartedly supports Mr. Torres' petition for mercy. My government
greatly appreciates this opportunity to express our deeply-felt concerns and
I am confident that your response will be both just and humane.
I respectfully urge this Board to consider these two key factors in Mr.
Torres's case: the insufficient evidence to support his murder convictions,
and the lack of consular notification, which precluded the possibility of
proper legal assistance.
For all these reasons, the Government of Mexico believes that Mr. Torres
does not deserve to die. I respectfully ask that you recommend that his
death sentence be commuted.
Clemency Recommended for Death Row Inmate
By JULIE E. BISBEE
Associated Press Writer
May 7, 2004, 3:24 PM EDT
McALESTER, Okla. -- A state board recommended clemency for a death row inmate Friday who supporters say was denied his rights as a Mexican citizen.
Gov. Brad Henry will consider the recommendation of the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board. Osbaldo Torres, 29, is slated to be put to death May 18 for slaying an Oklahoma City couple during a burglary in 1993.
Torres is one of 51 Mexicans on death row across the country cited in a March 31 ruling by the International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands. The world court found their rights were violated because they were not told they could receive help from their governments as guaranteed by the 1963 Vienna Convention.
Torres is the first Mexican on death row to seek relief under the world court ruling.
Mexican Ambassador Carlos de Icaza told the pardon and parole board that in addition to Torres' rights being violated, the facts of the case fail to show he committed the murders.
A group of 10 former diplomats, professors and law school faculty members have filed legal briefs in support of Torres' appeal, which is pending before the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.
The group has urged the court to review the case, saying failure to do so has international repercussions.
Torres and a second man were convicted in 1996 in the deaths of Francisco Morales and Maria Yanez. The couple were shot and killed as they lay in bed in their Oklahoma City home.
Torres' attorneys argue that he and his family weren't even told they could contact the Mexican consulate. Torres' parents, who illegally crossed from Mexico into the United States in the mid-1980s, saved their earnings from his father's welding job and his mother's cleaning work to pay for their son's legal defense.
The Torres family contacted the consulate after Torres had been on death row for nearly a year.
Torres' first trial ended when the jury could not reach a verdict. In his second trial, Torres and co-defendant George Ochoa were both found guilty and sentenced to death.
No execution date has been set for Ochoa, who has several appeals pending, including one claiming that he is mentally retarded.
Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press
Court Says U.S. Violated Mexicans' Rights
The International Court of Justice on Wednesday ruled that the United States violated the rights of 51 Mexicans on death row and ordered their cases be reviewed.
The United Nations' highest judiciary, also known as the world court, was considering a suit filed by Mexico claiming 52 convicted murderers weren't given their right to assistance from their government.
"The U.S. should provide by means of its own choosing meaningful review of the conviction and sentence'' of the Mexicans, presiding judge Shi Jiuyong said.
Shi said the review, in all but three cases, could be carried out under the normal appeals process in the United States.
But for three men whose have already exhausted all other appeals, the court said the United States should make an exception and review their cases one last time.
The court found that in the remaining case, the convict had received his rights and his case didn't need to be reviewed.
At the heart of the Mexico-U.S. case is the 1963 Vienna Convention, which guarantees people accused of a serious crime while in a foreign country the right to contact their own government for help and that they be informed of that right by arresting authorities.
The world court is charged with resolving disputes between nations and has jurisdiction over the treaty. It found that U.S. authorities hadn't properly informed the 51 men of their rights when they realized they were foreigners.
Both the United States and Mexico were preparing reactions to the ruling.
The United States had argued the case was a sovereignty issue, and the 15-judge tribunal should be wary of allowing itself to be used as a criminal appeals court, which is not its mandate.
In hearings in December, lawyers for Mexico argued that any U.S. citizen accused of a serious crime abroad would want the same right, and the only fair solution for the men allegedly denied diplomatic help was to start their legal processes all over again.
Juan Manuel Gomez said that Mexico "doesn't contest the United States' right as a sovereign country to impose the death penalty for the most grave crimes," but wants to make sure its citizens aren't abused by a foreign legal system they don't always understand.
U.S. lawyer William Taft argued that the prisoners had received fair trials. He said even if the prisoners didn't get consular help, the way to remedy the wrong "must be left to the United States."
In its written arguments, the United States said that Mexico's request would be a "radical intrusion" into the U.S. justice system, contradicting laws and customs in every city and state in the nation.
"The court has never ordered any form of restitution nearly as far reaching as that sought by Mexico," the arguments said.
In 2001, a similar case came before the court filed by Germany to stop the execution of 2 German brothers who also had not been informed of their right to consular assistance. One brother was executed before the court could act. The judges ordered a stay of execution for the second brother, Walter LaGrand, until it could deliberate, but he was executed anyway by the state authorities of Arizona.
Under the court's statute, its judgments are "binding, final and without appeal." Its rulings have rarely been ignored, and if one side claims the other has failed to carry out the court's decision, it may take the issue to the U.N. Security Council.
When the court finally handed down the belated ruling in 2001, it chastised the U.S. government for not halting the LaGrand execution, and rejected arguments that Washington was powerless to intervene in criminal cases under the authority of the individual states.
Mexican President Vicente Fox canceled a visit to President Bush's ranch in 2002 to protest the execution of a Mexican citizen not mentioned in the world court suit. The visit finally took place earlier this month.
(sources: Associated Press & New York Times) - March 31, 2004
March 2, 2004 - Court slates Torres’ execution
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals set a May 18 execution date Monday
for a man who was convicted of killing an Oklahoma City couple.
Osvaldo Aguilera Torres, 28, was convicted of the 1993 murders of
Francisco Morales and Morales' wife, Maria.
Torres is the 3rd death row inmate awaiting execution in Oklahoma.
The others are David Jay Brown, scheduled to be executed March 9, and Hung
Thanh Le, set to be executed March 23.
(source: Associated Press)
Clemency Information
Oklahoma is a state in which the Board’s clemency recommendation is binding on the Governor. This procedural rule means the Governor cannot grant clemency without the Board’s recommendation. However, if the Board does recommend clemency, the Governor does not have to follow that recommendation. Below is the contact information for the Board and the Governor.
Governor
Hon. Charles Bradford Henry
Governor of Oklahoma
State Capitol Building
Room 212
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Board of Pardons and Paroles
Mr. Patrick Morgan
Chair
Oklahoma Board of Pardons and Parole
4040 North Lincoln Boulevard, Suite 219
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
|
