Another day, another interpretation of Oregon’s new law limiting the death penalty

The former House majority leader who helped spearhead a new law limiting death penalty cases said Thursday the legislation was written as she intended and she doesn’t support a call for a special session to fix it.

Rep. Jennifer Williamson, D-Portland, told The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board that while she said during the legislative session that Senate Bill 1013 isn’t “retroactive,” she always meant for it to apply to previous aggravated murder convictions and death sentences that end up being reversed and sent back for new trials or sentencing hearings.

By “retroactive,” she meant the bill wouldn’t automatically overturn the convictions of people on Oregon’s death row.

And that remains the case, she told the editorial board.

Williamson’s remarks only seemed to deepen the confusion that’s emerged about the new law since the Oregon Department of Justice emailed prosecutors last week saying SB 1013 applies to death penalty convictions and sentences that have been overturned, as well as pending cases.

Gov. Kate Brown has remained silent since new controversy erupted.

It’s not unusual for aggravated murder convictions or death sentences to be overturned on appeal. In the past 2-1/2 years, seven cases have been reversed. None of the 31 people on Oregon’s death row have exhausted their court challenges.

The new law narrows the definition of aggravated murder, which is the only crime in Oregon eligible for a death sentence. Aggravated murder is now limited to defendants who kill two or more people as an act of organized terrorism; kill a child younger than 14 intentionally and with premeditation; kill another person while locked in jail or prison for a previous murder; or kill a police, correctional or probation officer.

On Wednesday, Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, who also championed the bill, said he planned to ask Brown to call a special session next month to address an issue raised by the Oregon Department of Justice.

Prozanski said he didn’t intend for SB 1013 to apply to cases sent back to lower courts for new sentences. He said he did, however, intend for it to apply to pending cases and aggravated murder convictions sent back to lower courts for new trials.

He characterized the issue as “an oversight” and “a mistake” that he hoped to fix in a one-day session.

“It’s very unfortunate that this was made because most of us were under the belief as to how it was written was going to accomplish what our intent was,” he said.

On Thursday, Williamson seemed to disagree with Prozanski’s initial take and defended the law. Both lawmakers are attorneys.

“This is not a technical error,” Williamson told the editorial board. “It does what we said it was going to do.”

During a June 19 speech on the floor of the Oregon House, Williamson said the bill wasn’t retroactive and only “applies to aggravated murder cases going forward.”

On Thursday, she tried to clarify what she meant. “It’s confusing because ‘retroactive’ in this sense is not necessarily the way you would use it in a non-legal way,” she said.

Williamson previously told The Oregonian/OregonLive that an unrelated bill, Senate Bill 1005, states that SB 1013 doesn’t apply to defendants who have previously been sentenced but have been granted reversals. Williamson said lawmakers wanted their intent to be clear so they added the language, on the advice of legislative lawyers, after Senate Bill 1013 had already passed both houses but Senate Bill 1005 had not yet passed.

On Thursday, however, she couldn’t explain why she had made those statements and acknowledged that her earlier explanations might have been unclear.

Meanwhile, the Oregon District Attorneys Association late Thursday sent a letter to Prozanski and Williamson, saying Oregonians were repeatedly assured the law wouldn’t be retroactive.

The organization asked for the law to be repealed or at least clarify to apply only to crimes committed on or after Sept. 29, when the law goes into effect.

“Anything less than that clear directive will not provide the certainty that our laws require,” wrote Beth Heckert, Jackson County District Attorney and president of the organization.

-- Noelle Crombie

ncrombie@oregonian.com

503-276-7184

@noellecrombie

Visit subscription.oregonlive.com/newsletters to get Oregonian/OregonLive journalism delivered to your email inbox.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.