In an amicus brief filed Thursday, six
civil rights organizations argue that a gay man may have been
sentenced to death rather than life in prison because of his sexual
orientation.
In their brief, the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of South Dakota, Lambda Legal, GLBTQ
Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), National Center for Lesbian
Rights (NCLR), and National LGBT Bar Association urge the Eighth
Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the appeal of Charles Rhines, a gay
man on death row in South Dakota for the 1992 murder of an employee
in the course of a commercial burglary. Rhines stabbed the
22-year-old employee to death after he caught him burglarizing a
doughnut shop in Rapid City.
“Plaintiff-Appellant Charles Russell
Rhines has offered evidence that some of the jurors who voted to
impose the death penalty on him in 1993 may have done so based on the
pernicious stereotype that the alternative – a life sentence served
in a men's prison – was something he would enjoy as a gay man,”
the groups wrote in their appeal.
The jury sent a note to the judge
asking whether, if sentenced to life without parole, Rhines would “be
allowed to mix with the general inmate population,” be able to
“brag about his crime to other inmates, especially new and/or young
men,” enjoy “conjugal visits,” and whether he would “have a
cellmate.”
The new evidence is statements made by
jurors. One juror said that the jury “knew that [Rhines] was a
homosexual and thought that he shouldn't be able to spend his life
with men in prison.” Another juror said that there was “lots of
discussion of homosexuality” during deliberations. A third juror
recalled a juror saying that prison is “where [Rhines] wants to
go.”
“Mr. Rhines’s case represents one
of the most extreme forms anti-LGBT bias can take. Evidence suggests
that he has been on death row for the past 25 years because he is a
gay man,” Ethan Rice of Lambda Legal said in a press release. “The
constitutional right to a fair trial must include the right to
establish whether a verdict or sentence was imposed due to jury
bias.”
“This Court should grant Mr. Rhines's
application for a certificate of appealability to afford him the
opportunity to establish whether prejudice against him because he is
gay factored into the jury's decision to sentence him to death,”
the
groups wrote.