Legal update on Mumia Abu-Jamal’s case
Published Feb 2, 2006 12:09 AM
Following are excerpts from a public letter sent out on Jan. 24 by Robert R.
Bryan, the lead attorney for death-row political prisoner Mumia
Abu-Jamal.
Dear Friends:
Last month, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadel phia, issued the most important
decision affecting my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, since his arrest nearly a quarter
of a century ago. This is the first time any court has made a ruling that could
lead to a new trial and his freedom. The court has accepted for review the
following issues raised on federal habeas corpus and in the subsequent appeal,
all of which are of great constitutional significance concerning the right to a
fair trial, due process of law, and equal protection of the law under the Fifth,
Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution:
Claim
14: Whether appellant was denied his constitutional rights due to the
prosecution’s trial summation?
Claim 16: Whether the
Common wealth’s use of peremptory challenges at trial violated
appellant’s constitutional rights under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79
(1986)?
Claim 29: Whether appellant was denied due process
during post-conviction proceedings as a result of alleged judicial
bias?
Claim 14 relates to the prosecutor’s prejudicial
argument to the jury including the comment that if convicted Mumia would have
“appeal after appeal.” That reduced the burden on the jurors, and
turned the concept of reasonable doubt and presumption of innocence on its
head.
Claim 16 concerns the prosecutorial use of peremptory
challenges to remove African-Americans from the jury. The record establishes
that race is a major thread that has run throughout this case since
Mumia’s 1981 arrest.
Claim 29 is about the bias and
racism of the trial judge, Albert Sabo. Evidence was discovered in recent years
through a courageous court stenographer, who overheard the judge say during a
trial recess that he was “going to help ’em fry the
n****r.”
Another issue under consideration by the federal court,
Claim 25, pertains to the death penalty. It addresses whether the death judgment
can stand due to an unfair jury instruction. Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367
(1988).
The case is now moving rapidly. The court has issued a schedule
for extensive briefing, with the first brief to be filed by the prosecution. The
District Attorney made a 30-day extension-of-time request, which has been
granted, so its initial brief is now due on Feb. 16. The complicated briefing
process will go through the spring. Then we will present oral argument before a
three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals.
This is a giant step in
our effort to secure a new and fair trial for Mumia. Our goal is to win in this
life-and-death struggle and see him walk out of jail a free person. However, we
must not forget that Mumia remains in enormous danger. If the case is lost, he
will die in the execution chamber.
Thank you for your concern and support
in this campaign for justice.
Cordially
yours,
Robert R. Bryan
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email:
[email protected]
Subscribe
[email protected]
Support independent news
DONATE