Neil, Benjamin, and Seganish, W.
Michael. (2011) "Life Without Parole Sentence for Juvenile Offenders: Loggins v.
Thomas in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eleventh Circuit No. 09-13267", Journal of
Business Cases and Applications 5: 1-6. [This article has been
retracted by the journal]
Link to original article: http://web.archive.org/web/20120511142721/http://aabri.com/manuscripts/111067.pdf
Neil
and Seganish, page 2
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), page 2
|
Kenneth
Loggins was convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 for the sadistic and
brutal murder of Vickie Deblieux. Because he was seventeen years old when he
committed the murder, the state courts eventually set aside his death
sentence based on Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 125 S.Ct. 1183 (2005),
which held that it was unconstitutional to execute anyone who was under
eighteen years of age at the time of the crime, id. at 578
State,
No. CR-04-1567 (Ala. Crim. App. Dec. 8, 2005) (order remanding to trial court
for resentencing). Loggins was resentenced to life imprisonment without
parole, see Loggins v. State, No. CR (unpublished memorandum opinion), which
was the next most severe penalty.
Alabama
law provided for the crime that he had committed, see Ala. Code §§13A 5-39,
13A-5-45. Having escaped the death penalty Loggins now seeks to escape his
life without parole sentence, contending that it, too, is an unconstitutional
penalty for him because he was not yet eighteen years old at the time he
committed the murder.
|
Kenneth Loggins was convicted and sentenced to death in
1995 for the sadistic and brutal murder of Vickie Deblieux. Because he was
seventeen years old when he committed the murder, the state courts eventually
set aside his death sentence based on Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 125
S.Ct. 1183 (2005), which held that it was unconstitutional to execute anyone
who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the crime, id. at 578–79,
125 S.Ct. at 1200. See Loggins v. State, No. CR-04-1567 (Ala. Crim. App. Dec.
8, 2005) (order remanding to trial court for resentencing). Loggins was
resentenced to life imprisonment without parole, see Loggins v. State, No.
CR-04-1567 (Ala. Crim. App. Apr. 21, 2006) (unpublished memorandum opinion),
which was the next most severe penalty Alabama law provided for the crime
that he had committed, see Ala. Code §§13A- 5-39, 13A-5-45. Having escaped
the death penalty Loggins now seeks to escape his life without parole
sentence, contending that it, too, is an unconstitutional penalty for him
because he was not yet eighteen years old at the time he committed the
murder.
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 2:
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), pp. 2-3
|
On
the night of February 21, 1994, a friend dropped Vickie Deblieux off on
Interstate 59 near Chattanooga, Tennessee. She intended to hitchhike to her
mother’s home in West Monroe, Louisiana, and had telephoned her mother to let
her know that she was coming. Deblieux made it as far south as Jefferson
County, Alabama. Unfortunately for her, Kenneth Loggins and three of his
friends were also out that night, drinking beer and using drugs. They spotted
Deblieux at an interstate exit in Jefferson County.
|
On
the night of February 21, 1994, a friend dropped Vickie Deblieux off on Interstate 59 near Chattanooga, Tennessee. She intended to
hitchhike to her mother’s home in West Monroe, Louisiana, and had telephoned
her mother to let her
know that she was coming. Deblieux made it as far south as Jefferson County,
Alabama. Unfortunately for her, Kenneth Loggins and three of his friends were
also out that night, drinking beer and using drugs. They spotted Deblieux at
an interstate exit in Jefferson County.
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 2
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), page 3
|
Promising
to take her to Louisiana, Loggins and the other men lured Deblieux into their
car and then drove her to a remote wooded area on the pretense of picking up
another vehicle. When she protested being taken there, Loggins assured her
that everything was okay. Of course, it wasn’t. Once they arrived in the
wooded area where the truck was located and got out of the car, Loggins and
the three other men began drinking again. One of them hit Deblieux in the
head with a beer bottle. She tried to run away, but they tackled her. As she
lay on the ground, Loggins and the other men kicked Deblieux all over her
body, over and over again. When they realized that she was still alive
despite the vicious beating they had inflicted on her, Loggins stood on her
throat until she gurgled up blood. She finally said “Okay, I’ll party.” Then
she died.
|
Promising to take her to Louisiana, Loggins and the other
men lured Deblieux into their car and then drove her to a remote wooded area
on the pretense of picking up another vehicle. When she protested being taken
there, Loggins assured her that everything was okay. Of course, it wasn’t.
Once they arrived in the wooded area where the truck was located and got out
of the car, Loggins and the three other men began drinking again. One of them
hit Deblieux in the head with a beer bottle. She tried to run away, but they
tackled her. As she lay on the ground, Loggins and the other men kicked
Deblieux all over her body, over and over again. When they realized that she
was still alive despite the vicious beating they had inflicted on her,
Loggins stood on her throat until she gurgled up blood. She finally said
“Okay, I’ll party.” Then she died.
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 2
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), pages 3 and 4
|
Loggins
and the other men threw Deblieux’s body into the pickup truck, and drove to
Bald Rock Mountain in adjacent St. Clair County, Alabama. Once there, they
removed all of Deblieux’s clothes. After playing with her naked corpse for
awhile, they tossed it over the side of a cliff. Loggins and the others then
left and went to a car wash in a nearby town. There they washed the blood out
of the truck and rummaged through Deblieux’s luggage before scattering it in
the woods near the car wash.
|
Loggins and the other men threw Deblieux’s body into the
back of their pickup truck, and drove to Bald Rock Mountain in adjacent St.
Clair County, Alabama. Once there, they removed all of Deblieux’s clothes.
After playing with her naked corpse for awhile, they tossed it over the side
of a cliff. Loggins and the others then left and went to a car wash in a
nearby town. There they washed the blood out of the truck and rummaged
through Deblieux’s luggage before scattering it in the woods near the car
wash.
|
Neil
and Seganish, pages 2 and 3:
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), page 4
|
Later
that night, Loggins and two of the other men returned to Bald Rock Mountain
and defiled Deblieux’s body. They cut off her fingers, and they removed one
of her teeth, and they cut out her left lung. According to Loggins, that was
not all that they did. He later bragged to some friends that he and one of the
other men had removed part of Deblieux’s heart, taken a bite out of it, and “spit
it into her face.” Loggins’ desecration of his innocent victim’s body was consistent
with some of his other behavior: he was involved with a “skinhead group,” he
sometimes slept in a cemetery, and he carried around a black notebook in
which he indicated his fascination with death, dying, and “Satan worship.”
|
Later that night, Loggins and two of the other men
returned to Bald Rock Mountain and defiled Deblieux’s body. They cut off her
fingers, and they removed one of her teeth, and they cut out her left lung.
According to Loggins, that was not all that they did. He later bragged to
some friends that he and one of the other men had removed part of Deblieux’s
heart, taken a bite out of it, and “spit it into her face.” Loggins’
desecration of his innocent victim’s body was consistent with some of his
other behavior: he was involved with a “skinhead group,” he sometimes slept
in a cemetery, and he carried around a black notebook in which he indicated
his fascination with death, dying, and “Satan worship.”
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 3:
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), page 4
|
The
morning after the murder Loggins’ girlfriend and another woman were looking
for him. They found him and two of his friends asleep in a pickup truck in the
parking lot of a fast food restaurant. All three men were covered in blood
and
mud.
When asked what they had been doing, Loggins replied that they “had killed a
dog or something that was chasing [his] truck.”
|
The morning after the murder Loggins’ girlfriend and
another woman were looking for him. They found him and two of his friends
asleep in a pickup truck in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant. All
three men were covered in blood and mud. When asked what they had been doing,
Loggins replied that they “had killed a dog or something that was chasing
[his] truck.”
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 3
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), pages 4-5
|
On
February 26, 1994, a group of hikers on Bald Rock Mountain discovered
Deblieux’s mutilated body and called the police. The body was taken to the
medical examiner’s office, where a full autopsy was conducted. The autopsy
revealed that Deblieux’s face was covered with lacerations, every bone in her
face was fractured at least once, almost every bone in her skull was
fractured, a tooth was missing, her left eye was collapsed, her right eye had
hemorrhaged, there were two large incisions in her chest, her left lung had
been removed, she had 180 postmortem wounds, and all of her fingers and both
thumbs had been cut off.
|
On
February 26, 1994, a group of hikers on Bald Rock Mountain discovered
Deblieux’s mutilated body and called the police. The body was taken to the
medical examiner’s office, where a full autopsy was conducted. The autopsy
revealed that Deblieux’s face was covered with lacerations, every bone in her
face was fractured at least once, almost every bone in her skull was
fractured, a tooth was missing, her left eye was collapsed, her right eye had
hemorrhaged, there were two large incisions in her chest, her left lung had
been removed, she had 180 post- mortem stab wounds, and all of her fingers
and both thumbs had been cut off.
|
Neil
and Seganish, page 3
|
Kenneth Loggins v. Thomas, 09-13267 (11th Cir. 2011), page 5
|
In
the weeks following the murder, when Loggins and the other three murderers
“seem[ed] bored,” they ““would kind of jokingly say let’s go pick up a
hitchhiker” and allude to other facts of their crime. A member of the group
showed a friend of his one of Deblieux’s severed fingers, which he had been
keeping in a ziplock bag. That led to the arrest of all four participated in
Deblieux’s murder.
|
In the weeks following the murder, when Loggins and the
other three murderers “seem[ed] bored,” they “would kind of jokingly say
let’s go pick up a hitchhiker” and allude to other facts of their crime. A
member of the group showed a friend of his one of Deblieux’s severed fingers,
which he had been keeping in a ziplock bag. That led to the arrest of all
four of those who had participated in Deblieux’s murder.
|
Neil
and Seganish, pages 3-4:
|
The Case of the Speluncean Explorers:
Nine New Opinions By Peter Suber.
|
Questions
1.
Decide the case morally. Not legally. Ignore the law.
2.
Decide the case under the law, support your verdict with arguments and show
the weaknesses (if any) in the case decision.
3.
Write a judicial opinion. Imagine that you have taken an oath to uphold the
law. Don’t appeal to your personal morality.
4.
Hold a discussion in which your group takes on the role of the prosecutors
deciding how to prosecute the case.
5.
Hold a discussion in which your group takes on the role of the jury. Your job
is to reach consensus, if you can. You are not bound by the constraints that
bind judges and you have the power, if not also the right, of nullification.
6.
Hold a discussion in which the group takes on the role of the legislative
subcommittee charged with drafting a new statute for this type of case. What
would you write into the new law. And how would you reach those decisions?
7.
What is the legal rule of law at issue in this case?
8.
After reading the case, do you think that the decision is straight forward?
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment