Miguel's Last Statement:
I want to thank my attorneys, Father Walsh...Sylvia, te quiero mucho y a
Consulado, te quiero decir muchas gracias por todo. I want to say I am sorry
and I say a prayer today for you so you can have peace and I hope that you
can forgive me. God is waiting and God is waiting now.

    The troubling case of a Mexican national scheduled for execution in Texas next month has raised international concerns over the failure of Texas to honor a binding U.S. treaty commitment. In a brief filed with the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, the government of Mexico called for a halt to the scheduled execution of Miguel Flores on November 9th, citing serious legal flaws in his arrest and subsequent trial.

    Miguel Angel Flores was sentenced to death in 1990, after a trial in which his court appointed attorney failed to present any mitigating evidence & testimony that Texas juries must hear when choosing between the death penalty and life imprisonment. In its amicus curiae brief in support of Flores Supreme Court appeal, Mexico points to the acknowledged failure of local police to inform Flores of his right to get help from the Mexican Consulate as a key factor in the unfairness of his trial and sentencing.
    "We firmly believe that timely assistance from the Mexican Consulate would have meant the difference between life and death for Miguel Flores," said Richard Ellis, one of the attorneys representing Mr. Flores on appeal. "
His death sentence is clearly unsound, since the jury heard none of the compelling evidence about this foreign citizen's positive character and background." Mexico decided to intervene in support of Mr. Flores' final appeal, after learning that he was prosecuted without ever being notified of his right to consular assistance, as required under an international treaty ratified by the USA in 1969. "The violation by Texas of Miguel Flores' consular rights was illegal and inexcusable," said Sandra Babcock, the Minneapolis attorney who filed Mexico's brief. "This breach of a binding treaty obligation directly contributed to his conviction and death sentence,
by depriving Mr. Flores of the essential legal assistance that every foreign national is entitled to including American citizens arrested abroad."
    Mexican consular officials have stated that they would have immediately assisted Mr. Flores from the time of his arrest onwards, by explaining his legal rights to him in Spanish and by ensuring that he was represented by competent legal counsel. The Mexican brief points out that Mr. Flores was informed by his interrogators that his mother was in custody as a material
witness and would be released if he agreed to discuss the crime. Mentally impaired and unfamiliar with U.S. legal procedures, Miguel Flores then gave a series of incriminating statements, without the presence of either an attorney or a consular official to advise him.
    Mexican officials would also have assisted Mr. Flores' trial attorney in developing and presenting a powerful case for a life sentence. The trial attorney, who speaks English only, called none of the members of Mr. Flores' Spanish speaking family to testify on his behalf. Due to the failings of his court appointed lawyer, the jury never even learned that Miguel Flores had no criminal record and no history of violence. Instead, the jury sentenced him to death based on the paid testimony of a psychiatrist who described the defendant as a dangerous sociopath, even though he had never conducted any mental examination of Mr. Flores or even met him.
    "The psychiatric testimony that condemned Miguel Flores was completely bogus," Mr. Ellis added. "During his decade on death row, Miguel has never shown the slightest sign of violent tendencies and has been a model prisoner ."
    "Dozens of foreign citizens are appealing their death sentences across this country because they were never informed of their fundamental right to consular assistance," Mr. Ellis noted.
"By agreeing to hear the Flores case, the Supreme Court would establish legal ground rules for addressing the very serious concerns that many cases have raised about the reliability and fairness of the US death penalty as it is applied to foreign nationals."

Contact list for additional information:

Attorneys:
Richard Ellis, e-mail: a.r.ellis@worldnet.att.net
Elizabeth Cohen, e-mail: lcohen@jump.net
Sandra L. Babcock, amicus counsel to Mexico e-mail: sbabcock@fishnet.com

General information on foreign nationals and the US death penalty:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/foreignnatl.html

        "THE BACK OF THE WORLD": EXECUTION IN TEXAS
 THE CASE OF MIGUEL FLORES: DEATH BY INCOMPETENCE
                                      
   Winner of the prestigious International Critics Award, San Sebastian Film Festival
                                                                                                 - September, 2000

"The behavior of defense counsel in the case of Miguel Flores demonstrates the failures of this system. What separates the executioner from the murderer is the legal process, which allows the State to judge and sentence those who commit heinous crimes. If this process is filled with errors, it threatens the legitimacy of our legal system."
    Emilio Garza, Fifth Circuit Justice, USA

"Texas did not sign the Vienna Convention, so why should we be subject to it?"
    Statement from the office of Texas Governor George W. Bush

"If Miguel is given a date of execution I would rather be dead. I don't want to be alive for his execution because I don't think I could deal with it."
   Tomas Rangel, grandfather of Miguel Angel Flores, in the film "The Back of the World."

Miguel Angel Flores is a 30 year-old Mexican national on Texas' death row, who
has a date of execution for this coming 9th November, 2000. If the courts deny his last appeals and Texas Governor George W. Bush does not grant him a stay of execution, Miguel Flores will be strapped to a gurney at six in the afternoon on the 9th of November, and three lethal injections will be pumped into his body. According to his current attorneys and the government of Mexico, who have appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, Miguel Flores did not receive a fair trial. The case of Miguel Flores illustrates three basic and potentially lethal
errors that characterize the legal system of Texas: the appointment of incompetent attorneys to represent poor defendants who face the death penalty, multiple errors in the sentencing process, and the flagrant violation by U.S. and Texas authorities of international treaties that guarantee consular rights to foreigners who are arrested , treaties that the United States expects will be honored by other countries with its own citizens.

Miguel Flores was sentenced to death in 1989 for the sexual assault and murder of Angela Tyson, a white woman, in the Texas town of Borger. Before the crime, Miguel did not have a criminal record and had led a productive and normal life. In fact, he had become a hero of sorts for his numerous immigrant family for his kind disposition and for being the first in the
family to graduate from high school.

The crime produced great anger in the community of Borger, amongst which the jurors were selected. However, despite that, the court appointed defense attorney did not prepare for the trial. He failed to hire a co-counsel, did not investigate or present evidence about Miguel Flores' lack of a prior criminal record or work life, and did not hire a psychologist to determine whether Miguel Flores suffered from a psychiatric disorder that could have
accounted for his sudden change in behavior, crucial evidence that can mean
the difference between life and death in a capital trial. Despite the fact that Miguel Flores entire family was ready to testify on his behalf, his attorney held no significant meetings with them, did not call them on the stand to testify, and did not present any mitigating factors that could have persuaded the jury to vote for life in prison instead of a death sentence.

    Texas juries can only vote for a death sentence if they agree unanimously that the defendant poses a future threat to society, after reviewing all available evidence. Faced with an absence of a criminal record in this case, prosecutors relied on the testimony of a paid "expert" hired by them, Dr. Clay Griffith, known amongst defense attorneys in Texas as "Dr. Death" for his frequent trial testimonies advocating for death sentences. Without ever having met nor examined Miguel Flores and in violation of minimal standards of ethics in his profession, Dr. Griffith assured the jury that Miguel Flores would continue to pose a threat to society for the rest of his life. Latter psychiatric tests and Miguel Flores' own exemplary behavior on death row for a decade have completely discredited Dr. Griffith's testimony.

    Lastly, Texas authorities did not inform Miguel Flores about his right to be assisted by the Mexican consulate, which had catastrophic consequences for his case. Under, the Vienna Convention on Consular Rights, the U.S. government has the obligation of informing any foreign citizen arrested on U.S. soil of their consular rights, but often violates the convention. In fact. Most of the 75 foreigners on U.S. death rows did not have those rights communicated to the. The Mexican Consulate would have explained Miguel Flores his rights in his own language, would have helped him to find a competent attorney and would have ensured that his counsel presented crucial mitigating evidence to avoid a death sentence. In fact, the Mexican government has an especially prepared team to death with Mexican citizens who face the death penalty in the United States, and has successfully intervened on behalf of
several other cases.
    These rights were denied to Miguel Flores. Alarmed at the systematic violation by the U.S. government of the consular rights of its citizens, the Mexican government is presenting an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court requesting a stay of execution on behalf of Miguel Flores. If this court denies the appeal, the final life-or-death decision rests with Texas Governor George W. Bush and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.

The family of Miguel Flores has come together to deal with his possible execution, which with be a particularly hard blow to his mother, Chayo Flores. Tomas Rangel, grandfather of Miguel Flores, who in the film The Back of the World stated that he would prefer to be dead by the time of Miguel's execution, is now faced with having to find a place to bury his grandson. The attorneys of Miguel Flores have asked those concerned to support their effort to stop Miguel's execution. They suggest that people write, fax or call the Governor of Texas and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles requesting clemency for Miguel Angel Flores.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CASE OF MIGUEL FLORES:

Amnesty International: www.amnesty.org
Madres y Familias Unidas Contra la Pena de Muerte (Mothers and Families United Against the Death Penalty in Texas, contact: Blanca Jimenez): 713-926-2799

Governor George W. Bush Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
Office of the Governor PO Box 13401
PO Box 12428 Austin TX 78711-3401
Austin TX 78711-2428 Tel: 001-512-406 5852
Tel: 011-512-463 1849 / Fax: 512-463 1849 Fax: 001-512-467 0945

                The CCADP offers free webpages to over 500 Death Row Prisoners
                                            Contact us for more information.
                                               info@ccadp.org