ILNews

Federal court stays Roy Lee Ward’s execution

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal appeals court judge Tuesday granted a stay of execution for an Indiana man convicted of the torturous rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl.

Roy Lee Ward, 40, was convicted in 2001 of the mutilation killing of Stacy Payne in Spencer County, and the Indiana Supreme Court in June affirmed his sentence. Ward had been scheduled to be executed on Dec. 11 barring a stay from a federal court.

Chief Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana stayed Ward’s execution for 90 days and appointed attorneys Marie F. Donnelly and Laurence E. Komp to file a writ of habeas corpus no later than March 4.

In June, the Indiana Supreme Court denied Ward’s bid for post-conviction relief from his death sentence after it previously had reversed his first conviction due to prejudicial publicity. Ward again was sentenced to death in 2007 after he pleaded guilty to the charges before a special judge from Clay County in a proceeding in Vanderburgh County.

The Indiana Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Roy Lee Ward v. State of Indiana, 74S00-0907-PD-320, held that mitigating factors such as Ward’s mental health and upbringing were properly heard in post-conviction relief, and in some cases Ward raised claims in PCR that were unknown at the time of his trial.

The opinion written by Justice Frank Sullivan detailed the grisly nature of Ward’s crime and found that any mitigating factors that had not been presented at sentencing would have been unlikely to persuade jurors to impose a sentence of life without parole.

“The dominant features of Ward’s makeup as it relates to this case are his antisocial personality and his total lack of remorse,” Sullivan wrote. “ … We found the evidence of torture and mutilation to be overwhelming.”

Ward is one of 12 people on Indiana’s death row at Michigan City, all of whose appeals are now in the federal court system, according the Indiana Public Defender Council.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Long overdue
    This puke is a perfect candidate for a horifficly botched execution. Come on Seventh Circuit judges, you can do this. Let's get this moving. Give him a date with no more stays.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT