John Balentine, a 54-year-old Black man, was executed by the state of Texas on February 8, 2023, for the 1998 killings of three white teenagers. Balentine previously dated the sister of one of the victims. According to one of the victim’s brothers, one of the victims threatened Balentine’s life due to his interracial relationship on multiple occasions, even posting a note on Balentine’s door referencing the Ku Klux Klan. Before his execution, Balentine said to the victim’s family, “I hope you can find in your heart to forgive me.” Balentine died 15 minutes after he was given a lethal injection, which is the subject of ongoing litigation in Texas. After Balentine died, the victim’s families high-fived each other.
February 20, 2023
In a Last-Minute Reversal, Texas Executes John Balentine Despite Concerns of Racial Bias at Trial
By Noah Berg, DPRP Intern
Balentine’s execution comes after a Texas District Court recalled Balentine’s execution date on January 31st. The execution was recalled because Balentine’s attorneys were not given proper notice of his execution warrant and execution date. Texas responded by calling Balentine’s legal team’s reading of the proper notification statutes “draconian.” The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sided with the State on February 8, and Texas executed Balentine a few hours later.
In order to be eligible to be put to death in Texas, the sentencing jury must determine that the defendant is likely to pose a continuing threat to society. The American Psychiatric Association, a critic of this sentencing consideration, claims that “the unreliability of psychiatric predictions of long-term future dangerousness is by now an established fact within the profession.” Academic research has suggested that both experts and Texas juries tend to make inaccurate decisions when making the difficult determination of who may be dangerous in the future. Critics contend that this consideration is not only unreliable, but also that it may lead to racist outcomes. Just three years before Balentine was sentenced to death, Duane Buck was condemned to die by the state of Texas as well. During the sentencing phase of Buck’s trial, a clinical psychologist hired by his own attorneys testified that Buck was more likely to be dangerous in the future because he is a Black man and, according to the psychologist, Black men are statistically more violent. The United States Supreme Court determined that Buck’s claims were not assessed using the correct standard and sent the case back to the lower courts for reconsideration. His sentence was later reduced to life in prison.
To challenge the constitutionality of his conviction and death sentence, Balentine’s post-conviction attorneys raised questions about pervasive racial bias during his trial. One of Balentine’s own trial attorneys passed a note to his other attorney, reading “Can you spell LYNCHING?,” perhaps referring to the fact that the jury which would condemn Balentine to die featured 11 white jurors, and no Black jurors. His other attorney slid the note back, adding a word, such that the note then read “Can you spell Justifiable LYNCHING?” Additionally, Balentine’s team declined to present any information during the sentencing phase of trial, the stage at which a defendant has already been found guilty and the only question remaining is if the defendant will be sentenced to death or life. Balentine’s team did not attempt to share with the jury a single reason why their client should live, falling well below professional norms of capital defense practice, which call for the preparation and presentation of an extensive mitigation case to help the jury understand what outside factors might have shaped the defendant and led to the commission of the crime. Balentine fought for years to have his ineffective assistance of counsel case heard on the merits. When a federal district court finally heard his claim, it was dismissed as meritless. The court determined that Balentine’s counsel made a “strategic” decision to rely only on residual doubt of Balentine’s guilt in the penalty phase of trial rather than introducing any mitigating evidence.
The main issue identified by Balentine’s habeas attorneys in their unsuccessful application for a stay of execution from the United States Supreme Court was the demonstrated bias of the jury foreman, Dory England. The defense team claimed that England lied about his personal background and racial views so that he was allowed to serve on the jury. They further claimed that the foreman “browbeat” other jurors who were willing to vote for a life sentence.” England wrote in an affidavit “if I ever saw Balentine on the street, I’d shoot him myself.” Balentine’s defense team also argued that the prosecution systematically excluded Black potential jurors.
John Balentine is the seventh person executed in 2023, and the third by the state of Texas. Texas, Oklahoma, and Missouri are the only states to carry out executions thus far in 2023. The three states accounted for 12 of the 18 executions in America in 2022. Texas and Oklahoma currently have a combined 13 pending death warrants for 2023. The only other states with pending death warrants in 2023 are Ohio and Florida. Ohio has eight pending execution warrants, but the state is operating under a de-facto death penalty moratorium. Florida currently has one pending death warrant for 59-year-old Donald Dillbeck.