Public Defender’s Office secures victory in death penalty case; New Jersey Supreme Court ruling means fundamental change in capital murder process.

TRENTON – New Jersey Public Defender Yvonne Smith Segars today announced that her office had won a victory before the state Supreme Court that changes the way capital murder charges must be pursued in the state.

In State v. Fortin, the Supreme Court ruled that New Jersey’s death penalty practice has erred by not requiring prosecutors to explain up-front everything they are going to use to try to convince a jury to sentence a person to death. Those so-called “aggravating factors” were not required to be presented to a grand jury at the indictment phase under the law as it stood when Steven R. Fortin was indicted.

“The Supreme Court is acknowledging that New Jersey’s grand jury system should be the mechanism by which a decision is made to seek the death penalty instead of vesting that power unilaterally in the hands of a prosecutor,” Public Defender Segars said. “While that is not as desirous as doing away with the death penalty, it is a move toward more fairness for the accused.

“This outcome is a testament to the hard work and persistence of the attorneys who have handled the Fortin case for our office. Their dedication has brought about this fundamental change in the law.”

The ruling was based in part on an earlier United States Supreme Court case, Ring v. Arizona, in which the high court ruled that aggravating factors must be presented to a grand jury. The state Supreme Court’s ruling applies to those New Jersey capital cases which have not yet reached the penalty phase, as well as those sought in the future.

In its opinion, written by Associate Justice Barry T. Albin and issued this morning, the court held that “(i)n a criminal justice system in which all of the elements of a crime must be submitted to the grand jury it would be odd to make capital murder the one exception.”

“What they’re saying is that the grand jury acts as a filter in the truth-finding process,” said Assistant Deputy Public Defender Jacqueline Turner, who argued the case with Assistant Deputy Public Defender Linda Mehling. “The grand jury must decide whether they agree that those aggravating factors exist, or whether they agree on the number that exist.”

Beyond that far-reaching portion of the ruling, the court also overturned Fortin’s death sentence and conviction, citing errors in the trial that worked against Fortin.

The trial court denied Fortin a fair and impartial jury during the guilt phase by refusing “to question prospective jurors regarding the affect of hearing evidence of Fortin’s sexual assault on a Maine state trooper.” The court said the trial judge should have determined whether jurors, especially those with ties to law enforcement, could remain open-minded during a case in which such evidence was certain to be introduced.

The Supreme Court also said the trial court erred during the penalty phase by not allowing Fortin to inform the jury that he could be sentenced to life without parole in lieu of the death penalty.

“You’re always very relieved to win a case like this,” Ms. Turner said. “There were many trial court errors in the guilt phase, in addition to those in the penalty phase.”