Prosecutors yesterday urged a Maryland Senate panel to shorten the lengthy delays that inevitably follow death penalty convictions by imposing stricter time limits and other new rules on the state's courts, prosecutors and defense attorneys.
Legislation submitted by Gov. Parris N. Glendening would have the effect of reducing the appeals process from an estimated 10 to 11 years to about six years, advocates said.
The bills are nearly identical to measures introduced last year by then-Gov. William Donald Schaefer and incorporate the recommendations of a commission he appointed to study the issue two years ago.
Differing versions passed the House and the same Senate committee last year, but the controversial measures died when the General Assembly's 90-day session ended.
Only one of the commission's recommendations -- replacing the gas chamber with lethal drug injection -- was approved and eventually became law last year.
In Annapolis yesterday, administration officials told members of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee that reducing delays would restore public faith in the death sentence as a legitimate penalty. Families of victims are harmed unfairly by unnecessarily prolonged appeals, proponents said.
Sue A. Schenning, Baltimore County deputy state's attorney, said the execution of John F. Thanos last May was slowed by appeals that even the defendant opposed. Yet she was forced to explain to his victims' families why the sentence was postponed again and again.
"This is an excellent [package of legislation] that is going to be an enormous asset to prosecutors who are out there in the trenches," Ms. Schenning said.
"This really cures a lot of the flaws that can be so frustrating to the victims of crime," she said.
Each death penalty appeal costs the state $300,000 to $400,000, on average.
Thirteen people are on death row, and the first in line for execution is Flint Gregory Hunt, sentenced to die for killing a Baltimore police officer 10 years ago.
The bills include 11 significant changes to the law. The most contested revisions would:
* Shorten from 240 days to 180 the maximum amount of time a defendant has to file a post-conviction petition.
* Reduce from two to one the number of post-conviction petitions that a defendant may file under most circumstances.
* Allow prosecutors more time to decide whether or not to seek the death penalty.
* Prevent a defendant who elects not to have a jury trial from asking for a jury to sentence him. If a defendant is tried by a judge, then sentenced by a jury, the case essentially is being heard twice.
Lawyers who defend death penalty cases said yesterday they agree with most of the recommended changes but oppose those four.
Eight months may seem like a long time to plan an appeal, but that much time is needed by the private attorneys who must handle the petitions, the lawyers said.
"We need that time frame," said George M. Lipman of the state public defender's office. "We are not a big state with back-up resources. We have to find private attorneys . . . to do this work for a measly amount of money."
Mr. Lipman said it would be unfair to prevent a defendant tried by a judge from asking for a jury at sentencing.
"That gives a shoplifter more rights than the defendant in a death penalty case," he said.
If stripped of the four controversial provisions, the package would be similar to legislation that passed the House of Delegates last year.
Still, administration officials expect the Senate committee to approve the governor's legislation, and perhaps even strengthen as they did last year.
But the package may face a fight on the floor where last year an amendment was tacked on making it easier to overturn convictions in cases of alleged racial discrimination.
That amendment caused the legislation to be returned to committee where it remained for the rest of the session.