People v. Cahill: domestic violence and the death penalty debate in New York.

• Author: Murphy, Russell G.

INTRODUCTION

For much of its history, New York has been a death penalty state. In 1995, after much controversy, and with great fanfare, Governor Pataki signed a new capital punishment statute, New York Penal Law section 125.27. (1) This law and related statutes manifested a community commitment to capital punishment, a belief in its efficiency as a criminal justice tool, and an expression of democratic majoritarian will that it be carried out. Recently, several trial courts imposed the death penalty pursuant to this statute. However, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the convictions and set aside the death sentences in each one of these cases. (2) And, in June 2004, in People v. LaValle, (3) the Court declared the "deadlock instruction" provision of the New York death penalty statute unconstitutional and enjoined imposition of the death penalty in the state. No one has ever been executed under section 125.27.

One of the Court's decisions, People v. Cahill, illustrates significant deficiencies in New York death penalty jurisprudence, deficiencies that raise issues about death penalty statutes in many other states. (4) The New York Court of Appeals decision in Cahill allowed a ruthless, calculating, and cold blooded killer to escape the death sentence on facts that most New York citizens, whether death penalty proponents or opponents, would find required the criminal law's ultimate punishment. In a state that relatively recently, and in great detail, statutorily recommitted itself to the death penalty, the result in Cahill illustrates serious shortcomings in New York Penal Law section 125.27 that should be remedied if and when the death penalty is reinstated.

Parts I and II of this article set forth the facts of Cahill, summarize the Court of Appeals' decision reversing James ("Jeff") Cahill's first degree murder conviction, and explain the bases for setting aside his death sentence. Part III proposes four new or modified categories of death penalty-eligible offenses covering: (1) deliberate and premeditated murder based on careful reflection and planning; (2) the intentional killing of incapacitated or vulnerable victims; (3) any intentional killing committed during the commission of serious burglaries without regard to the underlying crime supporting the burglary charge; and (4) domestic violence murder. Part IV examines the debate generated by the Court of Appeals' ruling in LaValle on whether capital punishment should be restored in New York. (5) The article concludes by urging that any new death penalty statute be revised to include at least one of the proposals contained in Part III of the article.

The people of New York, through their elected representatives, must, once again, make a choice on capital punishment. Recent Court of Appeals' decisions in death penalty cases leave New York without a workable death penalty law. Any legislative effort to revise the law must include "reforms" of death-eligible categories of murder that will make the statute meaningful, effective, and just.

1. THE MURDER OF JILL RUSSELL CAHILL

   Early in the morning of April 21, 1998, during a heated argument, Jeff Cahill hit his wife, Jill Russell Cahill, in the head with a baseball bat. (6) At least four blows were inflicted. To this day, no one knows the reasons underlying this confrontation.

   There were marital problems and a separation agreement had been signed, even though the couple continued to live in their marital home. The assault occurred in the presence of the Cahills' two young children. At some point, Jill Cahill cried out for their assistance because their "father was trying to kill her." (7)

   After the attack, rather than immediately calling for medical assistance, Jeff called his parents. Only after the arrival at the scene of Jeffs parents, brother, and a family friend, who happened to be a doctor, were the police summoned. They found the victim "covered in blood, writhing in pain and moaning incoherently." (8)

   Defendant initially lied to the police about his actions. He claimed that Jill had attacked him with a knife and that he had struck back with the bat in self defense. As evidence, he pointed to "cuts and scratches on his body." (9) Jeff Cahill later confessed that he had attacked his wife while she was unarmed and that his wounds were self-inflicted. (10)

   In June 1998, Jeff Cahill was indicted for first degree assault and criminal possession of a weapon. Regrettably, he was released on cash bail after answering to the charges. An Onondaga County Family Court then placed the Cahill children in the custody of their maternal grandparents and issued a protective order prohibiting Jeff from having any contact with his children. It also barred him from entering University Hospital in Syracuse, New York, where his wife was fighting to recover from his attack. (11)

   Jill Cahill's struggle was a Herculean one. From initial emergency surgery to remove a blood clot from her brain, to subsequent procedures to reduce brain swelling and fight life threatening infections, Jill held on to life. "By October of 1998--six months after the assault--Jill was able to recall the names of her children and had regained some ability to speak...." (12) However, unknown to her or her family, Jeff Cahill was plotting the murder of his wife.

   In July 1998, using forged documents, Jeff Cahill purchased, from Bryant Laboratories of Berkeley California, a quantity of potassium cyanide for General Super Plating, an East Syracuse business. Jeff Cahill then intercepted the delivery of the cyanide before it was dropped off at General Super Plating and convinced the delivery driver to give him the poison. (13)

   Between July and October, Jeff Cahill "cased" out University Hospital and obtained a fake hospital identification card, a wig, glasses, and a uniform resembling one worn by hospital maintenance workers. About a week before he killed his wife, Jeff was seen in Jill's hospital room disguised as a janitor. A nurse's assistant questioned Jeff about his presence and he responded that he "just came down to say hi to Jill...." (14)

   On October 27, 1998, after regular visiting hours, Jeff Cahill again snuck into the hospital wearing the wig, fake glasses, maintenance worker clothes--he even carried a mop--and reentered Jill's room. He then poisoned Jill Russell Cahill by forcing the stolen potassium cyanide down her throat "through her mouth or feeding tube." (15) A nurse found her at 10:00 p.m.; she was dead by the next morning. (16)

   Jeff Cahill's charges were consequently expanded to include an indictment for two counts of first degree murder pursuant to New York Penal Law sections 125.27(1)(a)(v) and (vii). (17) The jury found him guilty of these and other charges and, in the penalty phase of the case, imposed a sentence of death on both counts. (18)

2. THE NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS DECISION IN PEOPLE V. CAHILL

   Under the New York Constitution, the New York Court of Appeals is required to review cases in which the death penalty has been imposed. (19) In such cases the Court acts as a "thirteenth juror" and makes an independent review of the facts. (20) The Court must determine whether the weight and credibility of the evidence is sufficient to convict the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. (21) No special deference to the jury's decision is due in this process. However, this weight of the evidence review is made only if the evidence is legally sufficient to support the conviction in that admissible evidence was presented at trial on each essential element of the crime charged. (22)

   In People v. Cahill, the Court of Appeals made these analyses with regard to two separate first degree murder convictions. In 1998, New York law recognized twelve categories of intentional killings that supported a first degree murder charge and made the accused eligible for the death penalty. (23) In general, these categories involved killing a police officer, peace officer, correctional employee or a judge; repeat murders; multiple victim killings; killing by "life-termers" in prison or after escape; contract killings; torture; and the two specific categories relied upon to charge Jeff Cahill with the murder of this wife--witness elimination and killings during the commission of dangerous felonies specifically listed in the statute (including burglary). (24)

   First, Jeff Cahill was convicted of "witness elimination" murder under Penal Law section 125.27(1)(a)(v). This section applies when the victim was a witness to a crime and the killing is done for the purpose of preventing the victim's testimony at trial. (25) The prosecution's theory, accepted by the jury in Cahill, was that Jeff Cahill had learned of his wife's improving health and killed her to keep her from appearing at his assault and weapon trial. (26)

   Jeff Cahill was also convicted of committing intentional murder during the course of committing, and in furtherance of, a serious felony, burglary in the second degree, as proscribed by Penal Law section 125.27(1)(a)(vii). Here, the prosecution successfully argued that the unlawful entry of Jill's hospital room with the intent to kill her was burglary, and that Jill was murdered in pursuance of that crime. (27)

   The Court of Appeals reversed both of these convictions, reduced the crime to second degree murder, set aside the death sentence, and returned the case to the trial court for re-sentencing. (28) On the witness elimination count, the Court determined that the statutory words "for the purpose of", in relation to the prevention of trial testimony, did not apply to a case in which witness elimination was an "insubstantial or incidental" motive. (29) It did not require that the defendant's sole purpose be the prevention of testimony; it would apply only if witness elimination was a "substantial reason" or "substantial factor" in a murder. (30)

   Applying this standard in a "weight of the evidence" review, a majority of the Court of Appeals...