Appellate court arguments set for Charleston church shooter
Criminal Law
Attorneys for the man sentenced to federal death row for the racist slayings of nine members of a Black South Carolina congregation are set to formally argue that his conviction and death sentence should be overturned.
Oral arguments have been set for May 25 before the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Dylann Roof, according to federal court records.
In 2017, Roof became the first person in the U.S. sentenced to death for a federal hate crime. Authorities have said Roof opened fire during the closing prayer of a 2015 Bible study session at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, raining down dozens of bullets on those assembled.
Serving as his own attorney in the sentencing phase of his trial, the self-avowed white supremacist neither fought for his life nor explained his actions, remorse, saying only that “anyone who hates anything in their mind has a good reason for it.”
Roof’s 2017 appeal to the 4th Circuit came as no surprise, as transcripts of hearings to determine his trial competency revealed that Roof told his lawyers he’d seek appeals to drag his case out as long as he could. With the passage of time, Roof explained, he expected white supremacists to take over the U.S., pardon him for the killings and make him governor of South Carolina.
Following his federal death penalty trial, Roof was given nine consecutive life sentences after he pleaded guilty in 2017 to state murder charges, leaving him to await execution in a federal prison and sparing his victims and their families the burden of a second trial.
After that sentencing, Solicitor Scarlett Wilson ? who had also been pursuing the death penalty ? called the deal “an insurance policy for the federal conviction,” ensuring that Roof would spend the rest of his life in prison, should the federal sentence not stand.
Wilson also said that she felt more confident a federal death sentence would be carried out under the newly minted Trump administration that it would have been under a Democratic one. At the time, there was anticipation that then-President Donald Trump might swiftly resume federal executions, following cessation of the practice under several several previous administrations.
Trump’s decision to reinstate federal executions didn’t come until 2020, however, when his Justice Department ended a 17-year hiatus, going on to oversee a total of 13 federal executions. Due to his remaining appeals, Roof’s case was not eligible for execution at that time.
Related listings
-
Tory Lanez pleads not guilty in Megan Thee Stallion shooting
Criminal Law 11/20/2020Rapper Tory Lanez pleaded not guilty through his attorney Wednesday to felony assault charges in the July shooting of hip-hop star Megan Thee Stallion. Lawyer Shawn Chapman Holley entered the plea in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom to counts of assa...
-
UK court says face recognition violates human rig
Criminal Law 08/05/2020The use of facial recognition technology by British police has violated human rights and data protection laws, a court said Tuesday, in a decision praised as a victory against invasive practices by the authorities.In a case trumpeted as the first of ...
-
Apple wins big EU court case over $15 billion in taxes
Criminal Law 07/15/2020A European Union court on Wednesday delivered a hammer blow to the bloc’s attempts to rein in multinationals’ ability to strike special tax deals with individual EU countries when it ruled that Apple does not have to pay 13 billion euros ...
USCIS to Begin Accepting Applications under the International Entrepreneur Rule
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it is taking steps to implement the International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), in accordance with a recent court decision.
Although the IER was published during the previous administration with an effective date of July 17, 2017, it did not take effect because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a final rule on July 11, 2017, delaying the IER’s effective date until March 14, 2018. This delay rule was meant to give USCIS time to review the IER and, if necessary, to issue a rule proposing to remove the IER program regulations.
However, a Dec. 1, 2017, ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in National Venture Capital Association v. Duke vacated USCIS’ final rule to delay the effective date. The Dec. 1, 2017, court decision is a result of litigation filed in district court on Sept. 19, 2017, which challenged the delay rule.