Arizona | Judge Rules That Arizona Death-Row Prisoner Who Had Been Previously Found Legally Insane Is Competent to Be Executed
Dixon was found incompetent to stand trial in 1977, when he was accused of hitting a stranger on the head with a metal pipe. He was treated in a state hospital, and at his January 1978 trial, O’Connor found him not guilty by reason of insanity. Civil commitment proceedings were scheduled to start within 10 days, but instead Dixon was released. The murder for which Dixon faces execution was committed 2 days after his release.
Dixon was not connected to the murder for 2 decades, and at his 2002 capital trial, he fired his court-appointed attorneys and represented himself. Dixon presented a convoluted argument that the charges were fueled by a government conspiracy. Dixon has filed multiple lawsuits and motions related this conspiracy theory since the mid-1990s, including a petition for writ of certiorari that was denied earlier this year.
In its May 3rd ruling on Dixon’s incompetency to be executed claim, Pinal County Superior Court Judge Robert Carter Olson applied Arizona’s statutory legal standard for determining competency, a standard that Dixon’s lawyers have claimed is unconstitutional. The court recognized that Dixon suffers from schizophrenia but noted expert disagreement about Dixon’s understanding of the rationale for his execution. The court also discussed Dixon’s intelligence and the absence of dementia as points supporting a finding of competence to be executed. Judge Olson ruled that Dixon has not shown that “his mental state is so distorted by a mental illness that he lacks a rational understanding of the State’s rationale for his execution.”
Eric Zuckerman, an attorney for Dixon, found it “deeply alarming” that the court relied upon “the discredited testimony of an unqualified expert who admitted to destroying the only recording of his interview with Mr. Dixon shortly before the hearing and to never asking Mr. Dixon why he believes he is being executed.” Dixon’s legal team is appealing the ruling to the Arizona Supreme Court.
At the competency hearing, Dixon’s attorneys presented evidence that Dixon is schizophrenic, has auditory and visual hallucinations, and has delusional thoughts. Dixon’s attorneys provided testimony from a psychiatrist with over 30 years of experience in diagnosing and treating psychotic disorders. The psychiatrist, Dr. Lauro Amezcua-Patino, visited and interviewed Dixon multiple times since 2011 and spent almost 40 hours reviewing documents. Dr. Amezcua-Patino confirmed Dixon’s earlier schizophrenia diagnosis and testified that he believed Dixon was delusional and irrational. Dr. Amezcua-Patino described Dixon’s long-held belief that he was being executed because of a government conspiracy. One of Dixon’s attorneys, Jennifer Moreno, summed up the argument in a statement saying, “[t]he execution of Mr. Dixon – a severely mentally ill, visually disabled, and physically frail member of the Navajo Nation – is unconscionable.”
The government rebutted this argument by presenting testimony from an expert witness who had never evaluated an individual’s competency to be executed before and who spoke to Dixon via video conference for 70 minutes. The State’s expert, Dr. Carlos Vega, is a former clinical psychologist who admitted he did “very little” research into how to perform a competency evaluation of this magnitude. Dr. Vega also admitted that he has never diagnosed or treated anyone with schizophrenia. Dr. Vega testified that he believed Dixon had deluded beliefs but was not delusional nor incompetent to be executed.
Before the hearing, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a motion arguing that the court should not hold a competency hearing because it may delay Dixon’s scheduled execution. In response, Zuckerman said that “[t]he state’s attempt to overturn the lower court’s proper decision to grant a competency hearing to Clarence Dixon, who has a history of schizophrenia and previous findings of legal incompetency, undermines the legal process that will determine whether executing him would violate the Constitution.”
Dixon was also denied clemency by the Arizona Board of Clemency on April 27, 2022. Dixon had previously filed a complaint against the board, arguing that because 3 out of 4 of its members are law enforcement officers, he would not receive a fair clemency hearing.
Dixon is a member of the Navajo Nation, which has historically opposed the death penalty. On June 6, 2021, the Navajo Nation Attorney General Doreen McPaul asked Brnovich not to execute Dixon out of respect for Navajo traditions. McPaul wrote, “Navajo culture and religion holds every life sacred and instructs against the taking of human life for punishment,” McPaul went on to say that “[t]he death penalty removes the possibility of restoring harmony whereas a life sentence holds the opportunity to reestablish harmony and find balance in our world.”
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, Staff, May 6, 2022
🚩 | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.
 |  |
Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!
"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde