Eight years ago, Robert Lee McConnell shot 25-year-old Brian Pierce nine times and stabbed him with a knife, before kidnapping and raping Mr. Pierce’s fiancee.
The Nevada man pleaded guilty in a trial at which he had been granted his request to represent himself. But later, he appealed his conviction and death sentence, claiming, in part, that he never should have been granted permission to serve as his own legal counsel.
Courts in Nevada rejected his appeals, but now, a federal judge has issued a stay of execution to give McConnell time to file an appeal in federal court seeking to overturn the state court rulings.
It is one thing if prosecutors or courts mishandle evidence or otherwise deprive a defendant of his legitimate due-process rights. He may reasonably seek to have a court overturn a verdict that was reached improperly because of the actions of others.
But is it sensible that an apparently sane defendant can use his own unwise decision to represent himself as an excuse to file an appeal to reverse a verdict against him or halt a just sentence? Won’t that simply encourage other defendants to use similar tactics in hopes of gumming up the legal process?
Defendants in death penalty cases in particular ought to be afforded full opportunity to defend themselves. But it is irrational to reward them for bad courtroom outcomes that they brought on themselves.