Death penalty doubts cloud Jones case 02/22/98

North Florida Builders Prestigious Custom Homes

Sunday, February 22, 1998

Story last updated at 9:58 p.m. on Saturday, February 21, 1998

Leo Jones, convicted of killing a Jacksonville police officer, will again appeal his death penalty case in Florida Supreme Court.- Gary T. Clark/file
Death penalty doubts cloud Jones case
Judge's criticism known as cop's killer appeals

By Vivian Wakefield
Times-Union staff writer

He's faced the Florida Supreme Court many times before, asking for relief from his death penalty conviction.

But when Jacksonville cop killer Leo Jones goes before the state's highest court Tuesday, it will be with the knowledge that the chief justice has said in published reports that the death penalty isn't working.

The hearing, on an appeal of the latest lower court decision upholding Jones' death sentence, could clear the way for Jones' March 24 date with the electric chair.

Chief Justice Gerald Kogan, who has voted twice before to execute Jones, called capital punishment cumbersome, saying it monopolizes Florida's high court, as about 380 people wait on Death Row in the state. Kogan said sending inmates to prison for life without the possibility of parole makes more sense.

Now that Kogan has aired his personal opinions about the death penalty, how will his views influence the Jones case? Attorneys, victims rights advocates, and other court watchers disagree on the answer to that question.

''I believe that if he's anti-death penalty, it would seem most likely that he would vote to give Leo Jones every opportunity to get him off,'' said Jacksonville police Sgt. Buddy Hayes, who was a friend of Officer Thomas Szafranski, who Jones was convicted of killing in 1981.

But Michael Radelet, a University of Florida professor and author of several books and law review articles on the death penalty, said many jurists around the country are opposed to the death penalty.

''Judges who are opposed to the death penalty are no more biased than judges who favor the death penalty on these issues,'' he said.

The Jones case goes before the Supreme Court for oral arguments following the recent denial by retired Circuit Judge Clarence Johnson Jr. to set aside Jones' conviction in the Szafranski murder.

The officer was gunned down while driving his patrol car near North Davis and Sixth streets in May 1981. Jacksonville police arrested Jones in a nearby apartment, where two Winchester rifles were under a bed.

One of the rifles contained Jones' fingerprints. Jones confessed to the murder but later recanted, saying police forced the confession out of him.

Jones contends another man, Glenn Schofield, killed Szafranski. Jones' lawyers tried unsuccessfully in a December evidentiary hearing to convince Johnson to grant Jones a new trial.

Ironically, Johnson made his ruling during the same week in which Kogan said in published reports that capital punishment wasn't working in Florida and was too cumbersome.

Former Tallahassee attorney and Supreme Court watcher Ray Marky said the issue is not whether Kogan's personal opinions about the death penalty will influence his vote but whether his comments will influence the public about the judiciary system.

''That's why judges are not supposed to comment on such matters,'' Marky said.

The only other judge Marky could think of who had done something similar was former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun.

''And everybody was a little bit stunned when he came out and talked about it,'' he said. ''It's very, very unusual.''

Many court watchers said they were shocked and surprised that any Supreme Court justice would make such a statement.

''For any justice to make an open unqualified comment as he did I think is inappropriate,'' said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, a conservative civil liberties education and legal defense organization. ''Obviously that is going to be one vote [against death] already before the case is even argued.''

Staver said justices should be careful about making such public statements knowing that those issues would be decided in their very courtroom.

''I think it destroys the public confidence in the judiciary as to whether there's going to be a fair hearing of the issues,'' Staver said.

But American Civil Liberties Union legislative counsel Larry Spalding said he doesn't think Kogan's vote will be any different than in the past.

Since joining the Florida Supreme Court in 1987, Kogan has voted both in favor of and against Jones. Twice in 1988, Kogan voted for Jones' execution.

In 1991, he voted for an evidentiary hearing in the Jones' case. In 1996, Kogan voted to affirm the second denial of Jones' second post-conviction motion.

And last year, Kogan twice voted for evidentiary hearings on Jones' claim that the electric chair was cruel and unusual punishment, thus staying Jones' execution. In October of last year, Kogan dissented in the Supreme Court's ruling that the electric chair was not cruel or unusual punishment.

''He is an extremely intelligent and judicial officer,'' Spalding said. ''Every member of the judiciary has an opinion on the death penalty.''