The California Supreme Court on Wednesday turned down a longshot bid by defense lawyers to reopen the case against Stanley Tookie Williams, pushing the four-time convicted murderer one step closer to his Dec. 13 execution date.
The ruling shifts the focus back to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has scheduled a closed-door meeting at his Sacramento office Dec. 8 to discuss Williams' request for clemency. The governor has virtually unlimited discretion to commute Williams' sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole or to let the execution go forward.
Because Williams' convictions have been thoroughly reviewed by local, appellate and federal courts, the California Supreme Court ruling Wednesday increases the likelihood Schwarzenegger will have the final word on the fate of Williams.
The court ruled on a 4-2 vote, with justices Marvin Baxter, Ming W. Chin, Carlos Moreno and Kathryn M. Werdegar voting to deny the defense request, and Chief Justice Ron M. George and Associate Justice Joyce L. Kennard voting to grant it. The one-sentence order contained no explanation.
Defense attorney Verna Wefald of Pasadena had filed a motion last month, seeking information about ballistics and crime-scene evidence, and about witnesses who testified against Williams in return for immunity or other benefits, in an effort to show that his conviction was unconstitutional.
The motion was based on a U.S. Supreme Court decision obliging prosecutors to turn over all exculpatory evidence to defendants, and on a 2003 California law enacted in the aftermath of the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart corruption scandal to make it easier to investigate when police are suspected of framing suspects.
Nathan Barankin, spokesman for California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, whose office opposed Wefald's motion, said he was pleased by the outcome. "The court reached the correct conclusion. The extraordinary relief Williams sought is reserved only for those cases that have legal merit; his didn't," Barankin said.
Wefald said the decision was "very disappointing, particularly because you don't know why they turned you down." She said she was encouraged that two judges "voted our way." While she would not say what her next move will be, Wefald made it clear that she will file more legal actions. "This is not the end of the case, not by a longshot," Wefald said.
