Two federal death row inmates, Shannon Agofsky and Len Davis, have taken an unusual step by asking a federal court to allow them to remain on death row after being granted clemency by President Biden. Both men, housed at the US Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, have declined to sign documents commuting their sentences to life without parole.
They filed emergency motions in federal court, arguing that the president’s commutation places them at a disadvantage in appealing their convictions, as death penalty cases receive heightened scrutiny compared to non-capital cases.
Agofsky and Davis assert that the commutation undermines their ongoing legal battles, stripping them of procedural protections specific to death penalty cases. Agofsky’s filing claims that the commutation imposes an “undue burden” that jeopardizes his appeals.
Similarly, Davis described his situation as a “fast-moving constitutional conundrum,” contending that the death sentence draws critical attention to alleged misconduct by the Justice Department. Their legal argument hinges on the belief that heightened scrutiny in death penalty appeals provides a better chance of identifying errors in their cases, which they fear losing if their sentences are reduced to life imprisonment.
Death Row Inmates Reject Clemency, Argue for Retaining Death Sentences to Aid Appeals
Despite their arguments, legal precedent does not favor the inmates. A 1927 Supreme Court ruling affirmed that a president’s commutation or pardon does not require the consent of the convict. Agofsky, sentenced to death in 2004 for killing a fellow inmate, was already serving a life sentence for the 1989 murder of a bank president.
He maintains his innocence in the earlier case and disputes the charges in the prison killing. Davis, a former New Orleans police officer convicted of hiring a hitman to kill Kim Groves in 1994, also claims innocence and questions the federal court’s jurisdiction over his case.
The clemency granted by President Biden reduced the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates, including Agofsky and Davis, but excluded high-profile inmates such as Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof.
Critics have debated Biden’s decision, with some viewing it as a step toward criminal justice reform and others questioning the inclusion of individuals convicted of heinous crimes. Agofsky and Davis, however, have positioned themselves as rare dissenters, seeking to retain their death sentences to bolster their appeals.
This situation underscores complex legal and ethical issues surrounding the death penalty and presidential clemency. While clemency is often seen as an act of mercy, Agofsky and Davis argue that it unfairly disrupts their pursuit of justice. Their cases highlight the intricate balance between the legal protections afforded to death row inmates and the broader debates about the death penalty’s place in the American criminal justice system.
