Tuesday, March 1, 2005 | 11:08 a.m.
Many defense attorneys in Clark County this morning applauded the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that bans the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, but District Attorney David Roger said the ruling will prevent justice from being served.
"This is a great day for teenage killers and a very dark day for the families of their victims," Roger said.
Nevada was one of 19 states that allowed executions of people for crimes committed when the defendants were as young as 16. The state has not executed a minor since 1949, but one man is on Nevada's death row for a crime he committed when he was 16.
Roger noted that immediate effect of the ruling is that inmate, Michael Domingues, will not be executed even though he was found guilty of killing two people, including a 4-year-old boy.
According to court documents, Domingues waited behind the front door of Arjin Chanel Pechpo's Las Vegas home in Ocotber 1993 to rob her and when she arrived he threatened her with a gun, tied her up and strangled her.
Domingues then dragged her body to the bathtub, filled it with water and ordered her son to get into the tub. He then threw a hair dryer into the tub in an attempt to electrocute the boy. When the electrocution failed, Domingues stabbed the boy numerous times, killing him.
Domingues, now 22, was convicted and sentenced to death for the killings, but because of today's ruling his sentence will be reduced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Roger also noted that the ruling means Monique Maestas will no longer be facing the death penalty.
She and her brother, Beau Maestas, are charged with murder and attempted murder in connection with the January 2003 Mesquite stabbing attack that killed 3-year-old Krystianna Cowan and left her then-10-year-old sister, Brittney Bergeron, a paraplegic. Monique Maestas was 17 at the time of the attack.
Roger said his objection to the Supreme Court decision is that it "takes away the option for a jury to sentence a very violent teenage killer to death. In the past jurors have been able to listen to defense attorneys argue as to the past history of teenage defendants facing death and their mental status, allowing them to make informed decisions. Now they will not."
But Gary Peck, executive director of Nevada's American Civil Liberties Union chapter, and numerous defense lawyers hailed the Supreme Court decision as a victory for human rights.
Defense attorney Robert Langford said he was relieved when he heard the high court's ruling because he is currently representing a 17-year-old who was facing the possibility of the death penalty at his trial scheduled for Nov. 29 before District Judge Lee Gates.
Branden Tabile is accused of killing 50-year-old James Greene inside a condominium near Valley View Boulevard and Spring Mountain Road in May.
"I was appalled at how our district attorney was arguing so aggressively to preserve this form of unconstitutional punishment," Langford said this morning.
"Sure we have those rare cases that the person is an adult where the death penalty might possibly be justified, but when you factor in the youth of the defendant it makes no sense. All it does is jack up the cost of a trial and give prosecutors an extra edge during the trial. Most juries won't even sentence a juvenile to death."
Greg Denue, on the other hand, is in the unusual position of being a defense attorney who is not against the death penalty. Denue said although he "always argues for life" when representing an individual facing the death penalty, he feels even with minors such a decision should be up to a jury.
"I feel it should essentially be determined on a case by case basis," Denue said. "I believe strongly that young kids, 12 and 13-year-olds should never face the death penalty. It's gets more questionable though when you have a 17-year-old who commits murder a day before he turns 18. Is there a magical infusing with adulthood when one day passed and you are no longer a juvenile?"
Attorney Herb Sachs said he hoped the ruling would serve as a platform to abolish the Nevada law that requires anyone over 8 years old charged with murder or attempted murder to be treated as an adult.
"We all know juveniles don't act the same way as adults," Sachs said. "We have juvenile statutes for that very reason, but unfortunately we have a district attorney's office that for some reasons pushes the juvenile statutes aside and treats them as adults."
Late last month, some lawmakers, joined by Clark County Public Defender Phil Kohn, advocated strongly at the for a state ban of executions of people for crimes committed when they were younger than 18. Prosecutors argued that the death penalty needed to remain as an option for the most heinous crimes, whether they were committed by teens or not.
"I wish our Legislature had been ahead of the curve on this issue," Peck said this morning. "But now that the United States Supreme Court has made it plain that those who commit crimes when they are juveniles should not be executed, we can rest easy that there will be an end to this injustice, in Nevada and nationwide."
Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, the Legislature's main proponent of ending the death penalty for juveniles, said she was thrilled by the decision of the court.
She said her bill, Assembly Bill 6, will still have to be processed by the to change state law to comply with the high court's ruling. She said the Assembly Judiciary Committee had already scheduled a work session on the measure this week.
AB6 prohibits a death sentence for a crime that was committed when a person was under the age of 18.
Giunchigliani, who has introduced the same bill in two previous sessions of the Legislature, said it will prevent the prosecutors from "using the death penalty as a bargaining issue."
archive
