Louise Harris

Case details

Louise Harris, an African-American woman, was 34 years old at the time of the crime (date of birth 6-16-1953). She was convicted of capital murder for masterminding the murder of her black husband, a deputy sheriff, in Montgomery County. She was sentenced to death on 8-11-1989.

Background

Louise Harris and Isaiah Harris had a failing marriage. Isaiah Harris regularly beat her.

Louise developed a relationship with Lorenzo McCarter and confided in him about the abuse. She asked McCarter to find someone to kill her husband.

Louise had a long history of abuse and trauma, including:

• She was sexually assaulted at age 11.
• Her older sister died suddenly of a seizure in her arms, leaving Louise at age 14 to raise her younger siblings.
• She saw her younger brother being pulled from a lake after he drowned, and she discovered the body of her father, who was murdered.
• She was beaten severely and regularly by her first husband, John Wesley Robinson.
• She was abused for years by her common-law husband Jesse Lee Halland and then by her husband Isaiah Harris, resulting in multiple trips to the hospital.
• She was also abused by the man from whom she had sought comfort, Lorenzo McCarter.

The abuse and trauma resulted in Louise suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Battered Women’s Syndrome and Dissociative Disorder. None of this evidence was presented at her trial.

The offence

Louise arranged for the murder of her husband on his way to work.

McCarter approached a co-worker who refused and reported the solicitation to his supervisor. McCarter then found willing accomplices in Michael Sockwell and Alex Hood. Sockwell and Hood were paid $100 and were given a vague promise of more money upon performance.

On the appointed night, as her husband left for work on the nightshift, Harris called McCarter on his beeper to alert him. McCarter and Hood sat in a car parked on a nearby street, and Sockwell hid in the bushes next to a stop sign. When the victim stopped his car at the intersection, Sockwell sprang forth and shot him, point blank, with a shotgun.

The jury convicted Harris of capital murder.

Investigation and arrest

Louise Harris was arrested after questioning.

McCarter agreed to bear witness to the conspiracy in exchange for the prosecutor’s promise not to seek the death penalty.

McCarter testified that Harris had asked him to kill her husband so they could share in his death benefits, which totaled about $250,000.

Trial

At the sentencing hearing, witnesses attested to Louise Harris’s good background and strong character. She was rearing seven children, held three jobs simultaneously, and participated actively in her church.

The jury recommended that Harris be imprisoned for life without parole by a 7 to 5 vote. However, the trial judge sentenced her to death.

Sentencing

The trial judge considered statutory aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

The trial judge found:

• One aggravating circumstance: the murder was committed for pecuniary gain.
• One statutory mitigator: Harris had no prior criminal record.

The trial judge also found as nonstatutory mitigating circumstances that Harris was a hardworking, respected member of her church and community.

The trial judge concluded:

“the one statutory aggravating circumstance found and considered far outweighs all of the non-statutory mitigating circumstances, and that the sentence ought to be death.”

App. 7

Although the jury recommended life without parole, the trial judge sentenced Harris to death.

In separate proceedings, all the conspirators were convicted of capital murder:

• McCarter and Hood received prison terms of life without parole.
• Sockwell, the triggerman, was sentenced to death after the trial judge rejected a jury recommendation of life imprisonment, again by a 7 to 5 vote.

Appeals

Supreme Court of the United States

The case reached the Supreme Court of the United States. The caption was:

• Louise HARRIS, Petitioner, v. ALABAMA
• On Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alabama
• Argued: Dec. 5, 1994
• Decided: Feb. 22, 1995

Syllabus content included:

• Alabama law vested capital sentencing authority in the trial judge but required the judge to “consider” an advisory jury verdict.
• The jury recommended life without parole, and the trial judge sentenced Harris to death after concluding that the statutory aggravating circumstance outweighed all mitigating circumstances.
• The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, rejecting Harris’s argument that the capital sentencing statute was unconstitutional because it did not specify the weight the judge must give to the jury’s recommendation.
• The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed.
• The Eighth Amendment did not require the State to define the weight the sentencing judge must give to an advisory jury verdict.

The Supreme Court affirmed:

• “Pp. __. (a) Because the Constitution permits the trial judge, acting alone, to impose a capital sentence... it is not offended when a State further requires the judge to consider a jury recommendation and trusts the judge to give it the proper weight.”
• “Pp. __. (b) Harris’ arguments for requiring that ‘great weight’ be given to the jury’s advice are unpersuasive.”
• “Pp. __. 632 So.2d 543 (Ala.1993), affirmed.”

The decision noted the Court’s composition and dissents:

• O’CONNOR, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which REHNQUIST, C.J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined.
• STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

The decision listed counsel:

• Ruth Friedman, Montgomery, AL, for petitioner.
• P. David Bjurberg, Montgomery, AL, for respondent.

Majority opinion content (selected verbatim)

The Supreme Court majority stated:

“Alabama law vests capital sentencing authority in the trial judge, but requires the judge to consider an advisory jury verdict.”

It described the sentencing scheme and the trial judge’s action, including the finding that:

• the trial judge found one aggravating circumstance (murder committed for pecuniary gain),
• one statutory mitigator (no prior criminal record),
• and nonstatutory mitigators (hardworking, respected member of her church and community),
• and concluded the statutory aggravator outweighed the mitigating circumstances.

The majority also stated its holding:

“We therefore hold that the Eighth Amendment does not require the State to define the weight the sentencing judge must accord to an advisory jury verdict.”

Dissenting opinion content (selected verbatim)

Justice STEVENS dissented, and his dissent included arguments that Alabama’s scheme gave the trial judge unbridled discretion to sentence a defendant to death even though the jury determined death was inappropriate, and that the lack of standards to guide the judge’s consideration rendered the statute invalid under the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The dissent stated:

“Even if I accepted the reasoning of Spaziano v. Florida... I would conclude that the complete absence of standards to guide the judge’s consideration of the jury’s verdict renders the statute invalid under the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

It further argued that judicial overrides could sever the link between community values and the penal system, stating:

“The absence of any rudder on a judge’s free-floating power to negate the community’s will, in my judgment, renders Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme fundamentally unfair and results in cruel and unusual punishment.”

Outcome

• Louise Harris was sentenced to death on 8-11-1989.
• The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the judgment of the Alabama Supreme Court.
• Hood and McCarter were sentenced to life without parole.
• Sockwell was sentenced to death.

Aftermath

The current legal status reflected that Louise Harris’s death sentence was reversed in October 2004, and she awaited re-sentencing. The case was identified as Supreme Court of the United States No. 93-7659 in the material provided.