Source: http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/death/US/elizalde1009.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 01:48:30+00:00

Document:
1009 01-31-06 TX Lethal Injection Jaime Elizalde Jr.
Elizalde was at a nightclub with his father when the two men got into a confrontation with Juan Guajardo and Marcos Vasquez. Four days later, the father and son returned to the bar and sat on opposite sides of the room. Jaime Elizalde, Sr. gestured to the two men to follow him outside of the El Lugar bar, where Elizalde Jr. was waiting for them. He pulled a gun and shot both men to death. A witness testified that from the bar he saw Guajado as he was shot. He further testified that, although he did not see the killer shoot Guajado, when he exited the bar he saw Elizalde flee with a gun. Elizalde, Jr. was paroled from prison approximately 8 months before the murder, serving 4 years of a 10 year sentence for possession of cocaine and car theft.
Fried chicken, onion rings, French fries, two bowls of peach cobbler, two milk shakes and two glasses of orange juice.
In a brief final statement, Elizalde thanked friends for their support and urged fellow death row inmates to "keep the faith and stay strong and put your faith in the Lord." "Many times in life we take the wrong road and there are consequences for everything. Mistakes are made but with God all things are possible, so put your faith and trust in him." Elizalde said that inmates talk about Supreme Court reprieves, but "the real supreme court you must face up there and not down here. The best reprieve is from God himself." Elizalde also urged them to keep their heads up and stay strong and expressed his love. Then he began praying as the drugs were taking effect.
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott offers the following information about Jaime Elizalde, Jr. of Houston, who is scheduled to be executed after 6 p.m. Tuesday, January 31, 2006. On March 26, 1997, Jaime Elizalde, Jr. was found guilty of the capital murders of Juan Saenz Guajardo and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez on November 5, 1994 and was sentenced to death on April 2, 1997.
After Jaime Elizalde, Jr. and his father, Jaime Elizalde, Sr. walked out of a Houston bar on Nov. 5, 1994, the senior Elizalde signaled through a widow of the establishment for Juan Guajardo to come outside. Guarjado and another man, Marcos Vasquez, walked out of the lounge and approached the Elizaldes. Fearing that trouble was brewing, the bar manager also went outside and saw Elizalde, Jr. pull a gun and fatally shoot Guajardo and Vasquez. A witness stated that he saw Elizalde, Jr. flee the scene with a gun.
February 10, 1997 Elizalde was indicted for the capital murders of Juan Saenz Guajardo and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez.
March 26, 1997 Elizalde was found guilty by a jury for the offense of capital murder.
April 2, 1997 Following a separate punishment hearing, Elizalde was sentenced to death.
June 9, 1999 The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Elizalde’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal.
February 5, 1999 Elizalde filed an application for writ of habeas corpus in the state trial court.
April 11, 2001 The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Elizalde’s state application for writ of habeas corpus.
February 25, 2002 Elizalde filed a preliminary federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in a Houston U.S. district court.
December 2, 2002 Elizalde filed an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus with the federal district court.
April 17, 2003 The district court dismissed Elizalde’s federal habeas petition and denied him permission to appeal.
September 10, 2003 Elizalde requested permission to appeal from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
March 8, 2004 The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Certficate of Appeal.
June 3, 2004 Elizalde petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
October 7, 2004 Elizalde’s petition for writ of certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court.
During the punishment phase of trial, the State introduced evidence concerning Elizalde’s prior criminal history, which included Elizalde’s criminal and school records showing a number of juvenile offenses, including felony auto theft. The state also offered testimony from prison guards explaining Elizalde’s involvement in several prison assaults, including one in which Elizalde stabbed another inmate with a shank.
HUNTSVILLE — A prayerful Jaime Elizalde Jr. was executed Tuesday evening for the fatal shooting of two men outside a Houston cantina more than 11 years ago.
In a brief final statement, Elizalde thanked friends for their support and urged fellow death row inmates to "keep the faith and stay strong and put your faith in the Lord." "Many times in life we take the wrong road and there are consequences for everything," he said. "Mistakes are made but with God all things are possible, so put your faith and trust in him." Elizalde said that inmates talk about Supreme Court reprieves, but "the real supreme court you must face up there and not down here. The best reprieve is from God himself." Elizalde also urged them to keep their heads up and stay strong and expressed his love. Then he began praying as the drugs were taking effect. Eight minutes later at 6:17 p.m. CST he was pronounced dead.
At the time of his arrest, Elizalde, 34, was on parole after serving almost four years of a 10-year term for cocaine possession and auto theft — a conviction he picked up at age 17. The double slaying culminated an argument days earlier between his father and one of the victims.
The lethal injection was the second this year in Texas, the nation's busiest capital punishment state. Three more inmates, among at least a dozen with execution dates in the coming months, are scheduled to die in February.
About 30 minutes before his scheduled execution time, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down late appeals attorneys filed in hopes of halting the punishment. Elizalde's lawyers argued he could be mentally retarded and ineligible for execution. They also challenged Texas' use of lethal drugs as the execution method, saying they caused unconstitutional pain and suffering. The Supreme Court, within moments of the announcement of its ruling on Elizalde, stopped a Florida execution where an inmate raised a similar claim about the drug use. State attorneys, in a court filing, said the mental retardation claim was meritless and "nothing more than a calculated attempt to postpone his execution." The injection complaint, they said, was frivolous and should have been raised years ago. They also argued Elizalde never exhausted administrative remedies within the Texas prison rules about the drugs used to kill him and wasn't entitled to court intervention.
Elizalde, who worked as a welder and dropped out of Houston public schools in the ninth grade, admitted in a recent interview from death that he was at the El Lugar bar the night of Nov. 5, 1994. That was a violation of his parole, but he said he was not involved in the shootings of Juan Saenz Guajardo, 29, and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez, 33.
"I don't know what happened," Elizalde said. "I had nothing to do with that. That was none of my business." He did not testify at his capital murder trial. Two witnesses familiar with him identified Elizalde as the gunman. "Everything was just hearsay and circumstantial," Elizalde said.
Jurors at his trial also were told of his leadership in the Mexican Mafia, a notorious prison gang. They also heard evidence of his involvement in assaults while in prison, including the stabbing of another inmate. "Sometimes you do what you've got to do," Elizalde said. "Fear has never been something that's gripped me. Death comes to all of us. ... "I've been in front of a gun where I've had the hammer come down and it didn't go off. I've been stabbed. I've been in so many fights. I've had to have my head sewn up. You have to adapt. So I can't really say I'm scared of dying."
Elizalde's father, who also was at the bar, was arrested in the case and jailed for some two years before he was released. Prosecutors said the father signaled his son, pointing out the victim, while heading outside. Both Elizalde and his father, who never was tried, denied any such signal.
Elizalde was set to die in November but received a reprieve after confessing to another killing that landed someone else in prison. He also said the man convicted of that slaying was responsible for the two killings that earned him a spot on death row. When a judge called on him two weeks ago to testify about the other case, Elizalde cited his Fifth Amendment rights and refused to answer questions.
Next on the execution schedule is Robert Neville, 31, condemned for the 1998 abduction and torture slaying of a 19-year-old co-worker at an Arlington super market.
Condemned killer Jamie Elizalde, Jr., was executed just after 6 p.m. Tuesday in the state’s death chamber in Huntsville for the 1994 murders of two men outside of a Houston cantina. Juan Saenz Guajardo, 29, and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez, 33, were slain as a result of an argument that started days earlier between Elizalde’s father and one of the victims, authorities said.
Elizalde admitted he was at the cantina that night in violation of his parole from a cocaine possession and auto theft conviction. But he denied having anything to do with the slayings. The owner of the bar and an acquaintance of the family of one of the victims, both of whom were familiar with Elizalde, identified him as the killer.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the inmate’s appeal earlier Tuesday. Elizalde's lawyers unsuccessfully argued the inmate could be mentally retarded and ineligible for execution. The defense also challenged the Texas use of lethal drugs as the execution method, saying they caused unconstitutional pain and suffering. The U.S. Supreme Court stopped a Florida execution last week after an inmate raised a similar claim. State attorneys argued the mental retardation claim is without merit and the injection complaint is frivolous and should have been raised years ago.
The execution was the second of the year. Marion Dudley, 33, was executed on Jan. 25 for the slayings of four people in Houston nearly 14 years ago. Three more inmates have death dates in February.
HUNTSVILLE, Texas (Reuters) - A Texas man was put to death by lethal injection on Tuesday for the 1994 murders of two men outside a Houston cantina. Jaime Elizalde Jr., 34, was condemned for shooting Juan Saenz Guajardo, 29, and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez, 33, on November 5, 1994. Eyewitnesses testified during Elizalde's trial that he shot the two men after they came outside in response to a summons by Elizalde's father. Elizalde protested his innocence throughout his trial and in interviews since being condemned for the murders.
Attorneys for Elizalde filed petitions on his behalf with the human rights commission of the Organization of American States, which called on U.S. and Texas authorities to stay Elizalde's execution.
On Tuesday, while strapped to a gurney in the death chamber, Elizalde thanked friends and family for their support while he has been in prison. He also spoke to the 408 Texas prisoners awaiting execution. "The guys back there waiting, keep the faith and stay strong and put your faith in the Lord," he said. "Many times in life we take the wrong road and there are consequences for everything. Mistakes are made, but with God all things are possible. So put your faith and trust in him," Elizalde said. "We talk about a reprieve or stay from the Supreme Court, but the real Supreme Court you must face up there and not down here," he said. "Keep your heads up and stay strong. I love you all. That is it. Stay strong. Thank you."
Elizalde was the second person executed in Texas this year. Texas leads the nation with 357 people put to death since the state resumed capital punishment in 1982, six years after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a national death penalty ban.
For his final meal, Elizalde requested fried chicken, onion rings, French fries, two bowls of peach cobbler, two milk shakes and two glasses of orange juice.
Texas, which executed 19 people in 2005, has 12 more executions scheduled, so far, for 2006.
Jaime Elizalde, Jr. was paroled from prison approximately 8 months before he was involved in the murder of two men outside a Houston nightclub. Elizalde had served almost 4 years of a 10 year sentence for possession of cocaine and car theft.
On November 1, 1994, Elizalde was at a nightclub with his father when the two men got into a confrontation with Juan Guajardo and Marcos Vasquez. Four days later, the father and son returned to the bar and sat on opposite sides of the room. Jaime Elizalde, Sr. gestured to the two men to follow him outside of the El Lugar bar, where Elizalde Jr. was waiting for them. He pulled a gun and shot both men to death. A witness testified that from the bar he saw Guajado as he was shot. He further testified that, although he did not see the killer shoot Guajado, when he exited the bar he saw Elizalde flee with a gun.
Elizalde was arrested a few months later in a drug bust. While incarcerated, Elizalde was a leader of the Mexican Mafia, a dangerous prison gang. Prosecutor Terrance Windham told the jury that Elizaldle stabbed someone in prison and assaulted guards; he added that the defendant had numerous chances to change his life, but failed to do so, adding that "the system tried to rehabilitate him, but he kept getting worse."
Authorities suspect that the defendant's father is hiding in Mexico. Defense attorneys had asked the jury to show mercy for their client because of his age, but that plea went unheeded. After convicting Elizalde for capital murder, in less than 1 hour the jury decided that Elizalde Jr., 25, would be a threat to society and sent him to death row for the slayings of Juan Saenz Guajardo and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez. After the judge read the sentence, the defendant smiled and patted one of his attorneys on the back.
In October of 2005, the Harris County District Attorney's Office asked the court to postpone the execution that was set for November 2 so prosecutors could bring him to Houston to question him about a separate murder case. Assistant District Attorney Jack Roady said, "We are still conducting our investigation," and added that his office wants to question Elizalde in open court. Elizalde is on death row for the Nov. 5, 1994, shooting deaths of two men. He claims he did not commit that crime, and his attorney argues in a clemency appeal before the governor and state parole officials that another man, Albert Guajardo, was the real killer. Guajardo was slain in 1995, and another man is serving a life sentence for that murder. Elizalde claimed in a sworn statement that he strangled Guajardo with a nylon rope, hit him on the head several times with a blackjack and slit his throat with a hunting knife. Guajardo's body was found wrapped in a carpet in northeast Harris County. Elizalde said he killed Guajardo because he stole drugs and "paperwork" from him. Another man, Hermilio Herrero, Jr. was convicted of killing Guajardo several years ago. The state's case against Herrero was based largely on the testimony - several years after the slaying - of two prison inmates who claimed Herrero bragged to them about killing Guajardo while he was serving time in a Beaumont federal prison.
Jaime Elizalde Jr., 33, was executed by lethal injection on 31 January 2006 in Huntsville, Texas for the murder of two men during an argument.
On 5 November 1994, Elizalde, then 22, and his father, Jaime Elizalde Sr. got into a confrontation over a pool game with two men in a bar. The elder Elizalde asked the men - Juan Guajardo and Marcos Vasquez - to follow him outside. According to witnesses, as the men walked out the door, the younger Elizalde pulled a gun from his waistband and shot them to death. Elizalde did not testify at his trial. He was identified as the gunman by two witnesses who knew him.
In 1989, at age 17, Elizalde was convicted of cocaine possession and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and was sentenced to ten years in prison. He served four years before receiving parole in February 1994.
A jury convicted Elizalde of capital murder in March 1997 and sentenced him to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence in June 1999.
Elizalde denied having anything to do with the murders. Although he admitted to being at the bar the night that Guajardo and Vasquez were killed - in violation of his parole - "I don't know what happened," he told a reporter. "I had nothing to do with that. That was none of my business."
Prior to a scheduled November 2005 execution date, Elizalde told a reporter that he knew who killed the two men, but he would not divulge any names because he didn't want to put his family in jeopardy. Also, he added, "I despise a snitch." Soon after the interview, however, Elizalde claimed in a sworn statement filed with the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles that Juan Guajardo and Marcos Vasquez were murdered by a man named Albert Guajardo.
Albert Guajardo was murdered in January 1995. A man named Hermilio Herrero Jr. was convicted of that murder and sentenced to life in prison. In his statement to the parole board, Elizalde stated that he himself killed Albert Guajardo. "The reason I did it," Elizalde wrote, "was because a substantial amount of drugs were stolen from me by Albert after he entered my home along with some paperwork with certain information he had no right to possess." At the Harris County district attorney's office's request, Elizalde's scheduled execution was stayed so that he could testify in the Albert Guajardo case. However, when he was called to testify in court, Elizalde invoked his constitutional right to remain silent. A new execution date was then scheduled.
Elizalde's last meal request was for fried chicken, onion rings, french fries, two bowls of peach cobbler, two orange juices, and two milk shakes.
In his final statement, Elizalde encouraged "the guys back there waiting" in prison to have faith in the Lord. "Many times in life we take the wrong road, and there are consequences for everything," he said, "but that doesn't mean you're beyond redemption." Elizalde then prayed and asked for forgiveness for his sins. When he finished his final statement, the lethal injection was started. He was pronounced dead at 6:17 p.m.
Do Not Execute Jamie Elizalde Jr.!
Jaime Elizalde Jr., a Hispanic man, faces execution in Texas on Jan. 31, 2006 for the shooting deaths of Juan Saenz Guajardo and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez, both Hispanic men. Elizalde, his father Jaime Elizalde Sr., Guajardo, and Vasquez reportedly had an argument at a bar in Houston. Elizalde Sr. convinced Guajardo and Vasquez to come outside where Elizalde Jr. is said to have shot both men. Elizalde was 22 years old at the time of the crime.
At trial, the bar’s manager testified that he had been standing outside and saw Elizalde shoot both men. However initially that same witness had told authorities that he was playing pool inside the bar with another man and did not go outside until after hearing gun shots. At trial, the statement that he had been playing pool was corroborated by the man he had been playing pool with. The bar’s manager claims that he changed his initial statement because the police had pressured and threatened him with jail time.
At the sentencing trial, Elizalde’s jury was not made fully aware of sentencing options. They were given the choices of a life sentence or the death penalty. However, they were not told that if sentenced to life Elizalde would not receive parole for 40 years. Perhaps if the jury had known that Elizalde would not be paroled in less than 40 years they would have chose a life sentence instead of the death penalty.
Since his trial, Elizalde has claimed that he did not have adequate counsel at trial. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that although Elizalde had a right to “competent counsel”, the law only requires “that counsel shall be ‘competent’ at the time he is appointed.” According to the Texas Court of Criminal appeals, “although Texas does recognize a limited right to competent counsel, it does not recognize a right to effective assistance of counsel.” Consequently, as long as Elizalde’s lawyer was deemed competent at the time of appointment, Texas does not require that that lawyer do an effective job of representing Elizalde. Unfortunately later appeals courts have agreed with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ interpretation of Texas’ laws regarding competent counsel.
Elizalde was 22 years old at the time of the crime. The only first-hand eyewitness was unreliable at best. Additionally there are issues with jury instruction at sentencing and with Elizalde’s trial counsel. Under theses circumstances, Elizalde should not be executed.
Please write Gov. Rick Perry requesting that Jaime Elizalde’s sentence be commuted.
Jaime Elizalde is now scheduled to be executed on 31 January. His execution was previously scheduled for 2 November 2005, but postponed to allow time for him to be questioned about statements he had made admitting to the murder of another man, for which someone else is serving a life sentence.
He was sentenced to death in 1994 for the murders of two men. No physical evidence links him to the crimes, and key evidence against him has been called into question. The two men, Juan Guajardo and Marcos Vasquez, were shot dead on 5 November 1994, outside a bar in Houston, Texas where Jaime Elizalde and his father had been drinking. Jaime Elizalde and his father were both arrested and charged with the murders. All charges against Jaime Elizalde's father were eventually dropped and he was released after spending over two years in custody.
According to a clemency petition presented in 2005, no physical evidence was presented at trial linking Jaime Elizalde to the crime. The prosecution relied solely on the testimony of two eyewitnesses. One of these, in his original statements to police, denied that he knew anything about the murders, neither having seen them take place nor knowing who was responsible, but later stated at trial that he had seen Jaime Elizalde carry out the shootings; the second eyewitness claimed to have observed the murderer for 15 seconds, in the dark, and only contacted the authorities to identify Elizalde as the murderer some months after the shootings.
The clemency petition also alleges that his trial and state appeals lawyers failed to investigate his case adequately. As a result, important evidence, including eyewitness testimony, supporting claims that he was innocent, discovered by attorneys presenting appeals to the federal courts has never been considered on its merits because it should have been raised earlier in the legal process.
All these points will also be made in a new clemency petition that Jaime Elizalde's attorneys are now preparing, which will also include a claim that Elizalde may be mentally retarded.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally. The United Nations Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty prohibit the execution of anyone whose guilt is not based on "clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts". Serious miscarriages of justice in capital cases have already occurred in the USA. Since 1973, 121 people who had been sent to US death rows have been released after they were found to be innocent. Others have gone to their deaths despite serious doubts about their guilt.
- urging that at least a stay of execution be granted to allow further investigation of the issues raised in his clemency petition.
Jaime Elizade is on death row in Texas, USA, with an execution date of November 2nd 2005. The Swiss journalist and film-maker Jacques Secretan has made a film, "One Life on the Edge", which is informative both about the specific case, and general aspects of the death penalty in the USA.
Gary Taylor, Jaime Elizalde's current attorney: Jaime was convicted in Houston, Texas of killing to men outside of a bar called El Lugar. From the day of his arrest and his charge Jaime has maintained his innocence.
Jaime Elizalde senior was arrested and held as a suspect in the Harris County Jail for two years. He was released in October 1999 when all charges against him was dropped. Jaime Elizalde Junior has been fighting his conviction since June of 1997 from Texas death row.
Why did you go to El Lugar that night?
I went to El Lugar because I was short on cash. I went to get some money from my dad. Upon getting there I asked him for $50 and he went to the bar and ordered me something to drink. He ordered me a coke. We sat down at the bar and I was talking to my dad. When my dad went out telling me he was going to call my mum and fix some dinner so he could go two guys came out right behind him. One called Gene and an other guy. A third guy walked out a side door. That seemed a little suspicious to me, what the hell was going on? I got up and followed the guy walking out the side door. He just turned around the corner and stayed there. No sooner than that happened then two or three gun shots ran out in front of the place. First I was worried about my dad. I thought he was the one that got shot. When I ran he was on the floor. When he was on the floor I looked around there was an other guy shot and he was bleeding from his head.
There was no physical evidence presented in Jaime Elizalde's case. The testimony against Jaime was the testimony of two witnesses who claimed to have had observed him doing the shooting. However as we look at it we have found witnesses and we have presented the court with witnesses that demonstrate that what these witnesses say could not have happened. I believe that Juan Milan's testimony is very questionable. Juan Milan initially on the night of the murder told the police that he never went outside the bar. Several days later he gave a written statement to the police, he said he never went outside the bar. It was only some time later that he came across and he said that he observed Jaime Elizalde commit this murder. And this was only after the victims family drove him to the police station to give that statement.
Roberto Garcia? Roberto Garcia's testimony is questionable just by the very fact that he says he observed the person only for 15 seconds or so. This occurred at ten o'clock at night, it was very dark outside this bar. The circumstances that went down itself questions whether Roberto Garcia could have ever seen what he says he saw. But what is even more important is that he didn't tell anybody. He left, he didn't tell anybody he saw anything, in fact Roberto Garcia left the country. And it was only after he came back and only after the victims family again got involved and drove him down to the police station that the police obtained that evidence.
How was it possible that the jury could come to this verdict?
The jury didn't have enough evidence and due to the fact that the translation from Spanish to English language, mostly the jury consisted of Caucasian therefore there wasn't any Spanish speaking jurors and also the translator that was provided through the court system did not translate every word as elegantly and as specific in the sense of providing the definitions of what was being told to them by both the prosecution and the defence. And so there wasn't any understanding in regards to what evidence was presented and what evidence wasn't presented.
Bill Hawkins... I don't understand his attitude. That man knew I was innocent. Afterwards when we came back after everything was done, I was found guilty, I was given the death sentence he came back and shook my hand telling me he didn't have any idea how they won the case with what little they had. Those where his own words. He didn't know how they won. I told him "You know I am innocent in this case, why did you follow it through?". To him it was just a job. He had a job to do.
I think about my sons every day, the years I have missed out that I haven't been there to be a father to them. I am lucky my ex-wife is a great mother. She is there for the boys. And ever since she remarried he is a guy to guide them. Their step-dad that guides them he is a good man. I am fortunate in that area. My ex-wife Mary-Alice is a good woman. And of course, my sons are good students in school, they are intelligent, they are smart, charming, witty... Everything... They got a good life ahead of them. My oldest one is Fransisco Javier and he is 15 years old, he is in high school. And my youngest one is Eddie-Roman and he'll be 14 this coming July.
My unique concern right now is for my son, because they've sentenced him to die for something we didn't do. The time I spent (in jail) is not important to me. The important thing is my son, the life of my son. I have no ill feelings towards anyone. What I want is the release of my son. Sufficient evidence, sufficient testimony have already been presented, but even so, they will not accept that my son is innocent.
LIVINGSTON - Three weeks before his rescheduled execution, Jaime Elizalde Jr. still maintains he is innocent of the crime that sent him to death row. But he has so far eluded prosecutors in answering questions about his eleventh-hour confession to a different slaying that put another man in prison. Elizalde will appear before a Houston judge via videoconference from death row Thursday to possibly testify about his involvement in the 1995 murder of Albert Guajardo. In another twist, Elizalde claims Guajardo committed the murders for which Elizalde awaits execution.
Last fall, the attorney for Hermilio Herrero Jr., the man currently serving a life sentence for the Guajardo murder, obtained a signed statement from Elizalde. In it Elizalde claims he strangled Guajardo with a nylon rope, hit him on the head several times with a blackjack and slit his throat with a hunting knife. Guajardo's body was found wrapped in a carpet in northeast Harris County. Oct. 31, just two days before Elizalde was to have been executed for the 1994 shooting deaths of two men outside an eastside cantina, a state district judge issued a delay so defense attorneys and prosecutors with the Harris County District Attorney's Office could question him in court about the second slaying.
Returned to Houston, Elizalde was brought to Houston in mid-December, and over a few weeks was interviewed several times with his court-appointed lawyer, Danny Easterling, representing him. He never met with prosecutors, nor did he appear before a judge. Easterling would not say what they he talked about.
When Elizalde does speak to the court from death row next week, "it's going to be brief," Easterling said. "He's not going to answer any questions concerning the Guajardo murder and the alleged affidavit." He added: "My client allegedly gave this affidavit to the defense team of Hermilio Herrero without any advice from his own legal counsel about the consequences. ... " But during an interview with the Chronicle this week, Elizalde said he has not decided whether he will invoke his right to remain silent under oath. He said he signed the confession and that he is guilty of killing Albert Guajardo.
Now set to die Jan. 31, Elizalde said he came forward with the information because he wanted to "clear my conscience and to help a man who didn't have anything to do with that" Guajardo slaying. Elizalde said he never expected to have his execution delayed and he did not want to return to court to testify. He also complained about his treatment in the local jail.
Two inmates testified Herrero was convicted of murder nearly four years ago. The case against him was largely based on the testimony of two prison inmates who claimed he had bragged to them about the killings years later while he was in a Beaumont federal prison for drug crimes. Elizalde and Herrero's attorney have said Elizalde contacted Herrero's family to let them know he was the one who had committed the crime. He did it, he said, because "I know what it feels like being here for what I didn't do."
Herrero's attorney, Norman Silverman, who filed requests in state district court and a state appeals court that Elizalde be brought to Harris County to testify about the Guajardo murder, said if Elizalde does plead the Fifth Amendment his "change of heart" would be "strange" given that he was so willing to give a written confession in the first place. Silverman said he visited Elizalde on death row in Livingston and got the affidavit signed Oct. 12. The affidavit includes a written confession that is "signed, notarized, it's exactly what he said ... it's also corroborated by what I understand the details of the case to be," the defense attorney said. Silverman said he is not sure yet how he will proceed with his client's case.
Assistant District Attorney Jack Roady said his office will wait to see what happens in court and what action Silverman takes before deciding how to proceed. Elizalde, in the Chronicle interview, also criticized the District Attorney's Office for relying on the testimony of "jailhouse snitches" to convict Herrero.
'Out in the world' Elizalde told the Chronicle that he knew both Guajardo and Herrero when he was out "in the world." Elizalde said he had been accused of the murder which he knew Guajardo had committed, but Guajardo "made the mistake of threatening my family." "I'm not a violent person," he said, "but when someone I know just killed two men threatens me, no, it don't work that way."
Meanwhile, Elizalde's attorney in the murder for which he is on death row, Lubbock-based lawyer Philip Wischkaemper, said he has sent a letter to the governor and the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole asking them to reactivate a previously filed clemency petition. That plea focuses on an innocence claim and includes evidence of mental retardation. Wischkaemper said he will focus on pursuing the mental retardation angle.
Attorneys for death row inmate Jaime Elizalde Jr. are asking that his execution, set for today, be postponed so they can pursue claims of mental retardation. Elizalde is to be executed for fatally shooting two men, Juan Saenz Guajardo and Marcos Sanchez Vasquez, outside an eastside cantina in 1994.
The two men killed outside the El Lugar Drive Inn had quarreled a few days before the shooting with Elizalde's father over a pool game. On the night of the murders, both Elizalde and his father were at the cantina. Jaime Elizalde Sr. was outside using a pay phone when the victims also went outside and were shot, reportedly by the younger Elizalde.
Elizalde, 34, claims he did not kill the men. But in October he confessed to shooting another man, Albert Guajardo, who he says was the actual killer in the cantina murders. It is unclear whether the two Guajardos are related. In an October interview with the Chronicle on death row, Elizalde said he felt sorry for the victims' families but repeated that he was not responsible for their deaths. "Are they going to find closure in seeing me die?" he asked. "If so, I wish them the best of luck. I think only time can heal the pain."
Elizalde was on parole at the time of the murders. He had previously been imprisoned for four years, during which he was a leader of the dangerous Mexican Mafia prison gang. He reportedly stabbed someone in prison and assaulted guards during that time.
Elizalde's mental retardation claim is largely based on an IQ test administered in 1990, when he first entered the Texas Department of Criminal Justice system for a drug-related offense. Elizalde scored a 60, which is below the standard used for mental retardation. The Supreme Court exempted mentally retarded inmates from execution in 2002, five years after Elizalde was convicted of capital murder.
The Harris County District Attorney's Office filed a motion last week to dismiss Elizalde's application for writ of habeas corpus and to deny his application for a stay of execution, arguing that the filings are "deliberate and manipulative efforts to avoid justice" and are "substantively without merit." Prosecutors claim that Elizalde fails to meet the three-prong test to show mental retardation, citing a higher score on a subsequent IQ test and stating that he never was diagnosed, considered or even treated as mentally retarded. Elizalde, who dropped out of school in the ninth grade, married at 16, had two children and had various jobs.
On Monday the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the mental retardation claim, but lawyers are pursuing that claim in federal court. On Friday, a federal district court denied a separate appeal challenging lethal injection as unconstitutional. A previous clemency petition was reactivated and is before the governor and the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole.
Aside from his defense attorneys, Karen Parker, a San Francisco lawyer with the Association of Humanitarian Lawyers, has filed an emergency petition on behalf of Elizalde with the Organization of American States' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The OAS has asked U.S. and Texas authorities to postpone the execution to further review whether there were any human rights violations in the case but are still waiting for a response, Parker said. "If you carry out an execution under these circumstances it represents a deliberate and egregious violation to the right to life," Parker said.
Elizalde had been scheduled for execution on Nov. 2, but a state district judge issued a delay so that prosecutors and defense attorneys could investigate a written statement allegedly signed by Elizalde in which he claimed responsibility for the 1995 murder of Albert Guajardo, who was strangled, bludgeoned and had his throat cut before being dumped in northeast Harris County. Another man, Hermilio Herrero Jr. was sentenced to life in prison for that crime.
Hello! This is Jaime Elizalde Jr. down here at the Texas Death Row. I am a 30 years old male looking to correspond to any person out there between the age of 24 to 35 in the interest of friendship. I am an American-Mexican raised in Houston, TX, who has been incarcerated for the last 6 years here on the row. I am an easy going person who likes to have a good time and into doing adventurous memorable things... so I am not boring! *smile* I enjoy all types of music, loved to go out dancing at clubs when out in the world. I am into sport bikes (motor cycles), art, out-door activities and even like to cook. Yeah, ladies, you heard correctly. I am a guy who's comfortable in the kitchen and cooking. I like to keep in physical shape by steadily working out.
I if there are any people out there with similar interest and of an open mind then pick up a pen and some paper to drop me a few lines. It gets real one some down here having to spend all day caged up in your cell with not much to do. I speak and write both English and Spanish.
Background: Following denial of his state habeas petition, petitioner, who had been convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death, sought federal habeas relief. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Sim Lake, J., granted state's summary judgment motion and denied the habeas petition. Petitioner sought certificate of appealability (COA).
(3) trial court was not constitutionally required to instruct jury that petitioner, if sentenced to life in prison, would not have been eligible for parole for 40 years. Request denied.
Jaime Elizalde, Jr. seeks a Certificate of Appealability ("COA") to appeal the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus. Specifically he requests a COA to appeal the district court's ruling that his claims 1) that he is actually innocent, 2) that the State withheld exculpatory evidence, and 3) that he was denied effective assistance of counsel both at trial and during his direct appeal are procedurally barred because they were not exhausted in state court. Elizalde also seeks a COA to appeal the district court's denial, on the merits, of his claim that the state trial court violated the United States Constitution when it refused to instruct the jury that if sentenced to life in prison Elizalde would be eligible for parole in forty years. As the district court correctly determined that Elizalde's claims were procedurally barred and that the Constitution does not require his requested jury instruction, his request for a COA is DENIED.
Jaime Elizalde, Jr., ("Elizalde") was convicted of the capital murders of Marcos Vasquez and Juan Guajado. Vasquez and Guajado were shot and killed outside the El Lugar bar. At trial, Juan Millan, the manager of the bar, testified that while standing outside his establishment he saw Elizalde, accompanied by his father Jaime Elizalde, Sr., shoot Guajado and then a fleeing Vasquez. Robert Garcia testified that from the bar he saw Guajado as he was shot. He further testified that, although he did not see the killer shoot Guajado, when he exited the bar he saw Elizalde flee with a gun.
Several days after the shooting, Millan gave a statement to the police wherein he stated that he was playing pool inside the bar with Fidel Razo at the time of the shooting and did not go outside until after he heard the gunshots. At trial, Razo testified that he was playing pool with Millan when the shots were fired. Millan disavowed the statement and testified that he was not initially truthful with the police because "he did not want to have any problems." He also admitted that the police pressured him, including threatening jail time, after he gave his initial statement.
After convicting Elizalde for capital murder, the jury determined that he posed a risk of future danger, and the trial court sentenced him to death. [FN1] Elizalde's direct appeal was denied and he applied for state habeas relief. Elizalde raised seven claims in his state habeas application: 1) that his right to equal protection and his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment were violated when the trial court refused to instruct the jury that if sentenced to life imprisonment he would not be eligible for parole for forty years; 2) that his due process rights were violated because there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict; 3) that his due process rights were violated when the trial court instructed the jury that it could consider the applicant's flight from the scene as evidence of guilty knowledge; 4) that his due process rights were violated because there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's affirmative finding as to the first issue of punishment; 5) that the multiple murder provision of the Texas Capital Murder Statute violates the cruel and unusual punishment provisions of both the United States and Texas constitutions; 6) that his right to due process and his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment would be violated if he was executed after review under current Texas clemency procedures; and, 7) that his right to due process and to be free from cruel and unusual punishment would be violated by the Texas government's failure to prevent his execution. In a written opinion, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Elizalde's state habeas petition.
FN1. At the punishment phase of the trial the state introduced evidence of Elizalde's criminal history including evidence of his membership in the Mexican Mafia. Additionally, the state presented evidence of Elizalde's involvement in prison assaults, including one in which he stabbed another prisoner with a shank.
Elizalde then filed a federal habeas petition raising twelve claims. He amended his petition and raised only the following seven claims: 1) that his right to equal protection and his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment were violated when the trial court refused to instruct the jury that if sentenced to life imprisonment he would not be eligible for parole for forty years; 2) that his due process rights were violated because there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict; 3) that his due process rights were violated because there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's affirmative finding as to the first issue of punishment; 4) that he is illegally restrained in his liberty because he is actually innocent of the offense of which he was convicted; 5) that his due process rights were violated when the State withheld material, exculpatory evidence from the defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland and Napue v. Illinois; 6) that he was denied effective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington when his trial counsel failed to fully and properly investigate his case prior to trial; and, 7) that his due process rights were violated when the trial court instructed the jury that it could consider the applicant's flight from the scene as evidence of guilty knowledge. The district court granted the State's summary judgment motion and denied Elizalde's habeas petition. It found that his fourth, fifth and sixth claims were procedurally defaulted because he failed to exhaust them in the state court. See 28 U.S.C § 2254(b)(1)(A). The district court further found that Elizalde failed to demonstrate "cause and prejudice," and that he did not demonstrate that failure to consider his petition would be a "miscarriage of justice" because he failed to demonstrate that he was actually innocent of the crime for which he was convicted. See Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333, 338-39, 112 S.Ct. 2514, 120 L.Ed.2d 269 (1992) (noting that "cause and prejudice" and "miscarriage of justice" are exceptions to procedural bars preventing consideration of a habeas petition). As to Elizalde's remaining claims, the district court found that the Constitution does not require that a jury be informed that if the defendant is sentenced to life imprisonment he would not be eligible for parole for forty years. See Green v. Johnson, 160 F.3d 1029, 1045 (5th Cir.1998). It further found that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to both convict Elizalde of capital murder and to sentence him to death. Finally, it found that Elizalde's due process rights were not violated when the trial court instructed the jury that it could consider evidence of Elizalde's flight as evidence of guilty knowledge. See Bailey v. Procunier, 744 F.2d 1166, 1168 (5th Cir.1984); see also United States v. Lopez, 979 F.2d 1024, 1030 (5th Cir.1993). The district court refused to grant a COA. Elizalde now applies to this Court for a COA to appeal the following issues: 1) whether the district court properly applied a procedural bar to his fourth, fifth and sixth claims and whether he is entitled to habeas relief on the merits of those claims; 2) whether the district court erred in finding that the Constitution does not require the trial court to instruct the jury that if sentenced to life in prison he would not be eligible for parole for forty years.
The Supreme Court, however, has clarified its position on this issue. In Ramdass v. Angelone, 530 U.S. 156, 120 S.Ct. 2113, 147 L.Ed.2d 125 (2000), a majority of the Court explained that "Simmons applies only ... [in] instances where, as a legal matter, there is no possibility of parole if the jury decides the appropriate sentence is life in prison." Ramdass, 530 U.S. at 169, 120 S.Ct. 2113. Therefore, the district court correctly concluded that the trial court was not constitutionally required to instruct the jury that if sentenced to life in prison Elizalde would not have been eligible for parole for forty years and reasonable jurists would not disagree as to its conclusion. Elizalde's request for a COA is DENIED.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 2254
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.