Deukmejian and Justice Grodin

I feel compelled to react to Warren Christopher’s essay (Editorial Pages, Sept. 23), in which he writes so disdainfully about my decision to oppose the retention of Supreme Court Justice Joseph Grodin.

Christopher correctly notes that in 1982, while I was a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission, I voted to confirm Justice Grodin’s appointment to the Supreme Court. What he fails to accurately portray is Justice Grodin’s record on death penalty cases during the ensuing four years.

According to Christopher, “in the 41 capital cases in (which) Grodin has participated, he has voted to affirm in some cases, for reversal and new trial in others, and to affirm with retrial of the penalty questions in yet others.” This hazy summary of Grodin’s record obscures a rather painful reality that Christopher tries to gloss over: Forty-three cases of convicted murderers have been presented to Grodin for consideration. He has voted to reverse 38 of them.

While Christopher may regard this record as one of “a justice trying his best to balance his obligation to enforce the death penalty with the need to ensure fair trials,” I believe it to be the record of justice gone awry, devoid of the balanced judgment which I had thought Grodin would exercise when I voted to confirm.

Justices Grodin, Cruz Reynoso and Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird defend their records by stating that they are just following the law. Yet their records stand in stark contrast to that of Justice Stanley Mosk. The latter has candidly expressed his personal opposition to the death penalty, but during the time that Grodin has been a member of the high court, Mosk nevertheless voted on 17 separate occasions to affirm death penalty decisions. However, Grodin voted to reverse 14 of the 17 cases that Mosk would have affirmed. Reynoso voted to overturn 16 of the 17 cases while Bird voted to overturn all 17 cases.

All of the justices review the same facts, appellate briefs, prior decisions, statues, state and federal constitutional provisions for each case. I am confident that Christopher would stipulate that Mosk is learned in the law. Yet Grodin, after considering the 17 death penalty cases affirmed by Mosk, reached a contrary conclusion in 14 of them.

Under our Constitution the people have reserved unto themselves the right to evaluate the record of Supreme Court justices who have been appointed to the court and confirmed by the commission. The record of individual justices on the death penalty is a critical consideration in forming my decision on how to vote, especially considering that the people of this state have voted twice, by overwhelming margins, in support of capital punishment.

Before becoming governor, I was attorney general and a state senator. I led the 1972 death penalty initiative effort and wrote the 1977 capital punishment statute. As a voter, I cannot vote to retain any Supreme Court justice who demonstrates a proclivity for substituting his or her own personal preferences for the law in death penalty cases.

GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN

Sacramento