Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Kerr was socializing with Pamela Horton and her friend Jennifer
York at a Fort Worth nightclub. Horton described Kerr as a "nice
guy" and lived in the same trailer park.
Later, an intoxicated Horton told York she was
ready to go and needed a ride home, but York was not yet ready to
leave. Kerr took Horton outside, then returned briefly and
whispered to another girl "I'm taking this drunk bitch home and
I'll be right back." Kerr then took Horton to his home, where he
raped and strangled her with his hands. He then put her body in
his car. After driving around a little, he pushed her body out of
the car.
At 2 a.m., a taxi driver spotted Horton's body
lying in the street, and paramedics arrived to assist. After the
paramedics wrapped the body, Kerr approached them and told them he
was the one who found the body. Police then arrived and noticed a
purse in Kerr's car. Kerr stated "If that's the girl I picked up,
maybe it's hers." He retrieved the purse from his car and gave it
to the officers. In it, they found a plastic hair clip with teeth
broken off. They also found a long strand of blonde hair on Kerr's
face which was recovered.
A search of Kerr's home yielded a torn bra,
panties, and a plastic tooth that matched the broken hair clip. An
autopsy of the victim showed death by strangulation and a blood
alcohol concentration at the time of the autopsy of 0.465. DNA
testing showed that the semen in the victim's mouth matched Kerr's
DNA. The bra and panties found in Kerr's apartment contained DNA
matching the victim.
Citations:
Kerr v. Thaler, 384 Fed.Appx. 400 (5th Cir.) (Habeas)
Final/Special Meal:
Pizza, fried chicken, baked chicken, lasagna, tacos, pork ribs
with picante sauce, cheeseburger, quiche with meat, cheese and
broccoli, and ice cream.
Last Words:
"To the state of Texas: I'm an innocent man. Never trust a court-appointed
attorney." Kerr then asked his friends to search for the person
who he claimed committed the crime. "Check that DNA, Check Scott.
Here we go. Lord Jesus. Jesus."
Name
TDCJ
Number
Date
of Birth
Kerr, Cary D.
999449
10/06/1964
Date
Received
Age (when Received)
Education Level
04/17/2003
38
10
Date
of Offense
Age (at the Offense)
County
Tarrant
Race
Gender
Hair
Color
white
male
brown
Height
Weight
Eye
Color
5 ft 9 in
219
green
Native
County
Native
State
Prior
Occupation
Dallas
Texas
warehouseman, maintenance mechanic,
laborer
Prior
Prison Record
none
Summary of incident
On 07/21/2001, Kerr sexually
assaulted a 34 year old white female, strangled her, then pushed
her out of a moving vehicle, resulting in her death.
Co-defendants
none
Race
and Gender of Victim
white female
Kerr, Cary D.
Date of Birth: 10/06/1964
DR#: 999449
Date Received: 04/17/2003
Education: 10 years
Occupation: warehouseman, maintenance mechanic, laborer
Date of Offense: 07/12/2001
County of Offense: Tarrant
Native County: Dallas
Race: White
Gender: Male
Hair Color: Brown
Eye Color: Green
Height: 5' 09"
Weight: 219
Prior Prison Record: None.
Summary of incident: On 07/21/2001, Kerr
sexually assaulted a 34 year old white female, strangled her, then
pushed her out of a moving vehicle, resulting in her death.
Co-Defendants: None.
Texas Attorney General
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Media Advisory: Cary Kerr scheduled for
execution
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
offers the following information about Cary D. Kerr, who is
scheduled to be executed after 6 p.m. on Tuesday, May 3, 2011. A
Texas jury sentenced Kerr to death in March of 2003 for sexually
assaulting and murdering Pamela Horton.
FACTS OF THE CRIME
In the early morning hours of July 12, 2001,
the body of Pamela Horton of Haltom City was found in a street by
a taxicab driver. An autopsy determined that Horton had been
beaten and strangled.
On the evening of July 11, Horton left a
nightclub with Cary Kerr. After escorting Horton from the
nightclub, Kerr returned briefly to the club and whispered to
another woman that he was taking Horton home and that he would be
right back.
An ambulance was summoned shortly after 2 a.m.
the next day when Horton’s body, wearing shorts but nothing else,
was discovered in the street.
After the paramedics had wrapped the victim’s
body, Kerr approached them and asked them to pull back the sheet
because he believed he could identify her. The paramedics
responded that they would not pull back the sheet but asked Kerr
to tell them who it was if he knew. Kerr stated that he was the
one who found the body and had called them. The paramedics
responded that no one “called” them; they were on the scene
because they had been approached by a taxicab driver. Kerr then
responded that he had flagged down the taxi. Kerr further stated
that he had not stopped his car upon discovering her body because
he thought she might be a robbery decoy and that he had seen a
black sedan with two male passengers parked nearby. Kerr also
stated that he recognized the woman as someone who frequented bars
in the area.
Police officers arrived at the scene, secured
it, and talked to Kerr. The officers saw a purse in Kerr’s car and
asked whose purse it was. Kerr first stated it was the victim’s
and then added, “If that’s the girl I picked up, maybe it’s hers.”
He became very nervous after this admission. Kerr retrieved the
purse from his vehicle for the officers’ inspection. A broken,
comb-like hair clip was attached to the handle of the purse.
During their conversation with Kerr, the officers noticed a long
strand of blonde hair on his face. Kerr did not have blonde hair
but the victim did. One of the officers took the strand of blonde
hair. The officers later arrested Kerr at the scene.
A search of Kerr’s home yielded a brassiere,
panties, and a plastic “tooth” for a comb or a hair clasp. The
brassiere was severely torn in two places. Examination of the comb-like
hair clip revealed that it had been manufactured with fourteen
teeth but eight had broken off. The comb tooth retrieved from Kerr’s
residence was the same color as the hair clasp, and microscopic
analysis showed a match. The forensic examiner testified that
considerable force would be needed to cause the observed damage to
the hair clasp.
The brassiere and the panties contained DNA
from the victim, and DNA testing showed that semen found in the
victim matched Kerr’s DNA profile.
EVIDENCE OF FUTURE DANGEROUSNESS
Michelle Landdreth and Kerr were married from
1987 to 1991. During their marriage, Kerr injured Landdreth on
several occasions. He would beat and choke her—resulting in black
eyes, busted lips, and bruises. She did not seek medical attention
or press charges because she was afraid of Kerr.
Diana Forgeson and Kerr were married from 1993
to 1996. Due to excessive drinking, Kerr became angry and jealous
and would hit Forgeson if she said anything wrong or looked wrong.
Cindy Huffman and Kerr were romantically
involved from 1989 to 1996. Kerr was often violent, both hitting
her and threatening her with a gun. Huffman reported Kerr to the
police and obtained several restraining orders against him.
On August 10, 1999, about 7 p.m., a woman
returned home with some decorating items from a store. When she
got out of her car, Kerr—who was house-sitting next door —was
waiting. Kerr inquired whether the woman wanted to come over for a
swim. The woman joined Kerr for a swim, but when she attempted to
go home, Kerr pushed her back into the pool.Kerr grabbed the woman
and asked her to show him her breasts. Kerr had both of the woman’s
hands behind her back. When the woman threatened to scream, Kerr
responded that he would kill her and dump her body into a lake.
Kerr then held the woman’s head under water. She was choking when
she managed to surface. Kerr ripped the woman’s shirt and
brassiere, and demanded oral sex. The woman submitted. The next
day, the woman contacted police. Kerr pled guilty to assault
causing bodily injury and was sentenced to one year in jail.
Officer Tim Clontz testified that, while
transporting Kerr to the Haltom City Police Department, Kerr began
cursing and kicking the passenger window. During the change-over
into jail attire, Kerr threw his blue jeans at Officer Clontz.
Kerr then threatened to kill Officer Clontz. A Tarrant County
jailer testified that when she was transferring Kerr to a
different cell, she found contraband, including tennis shoes, and
attempted to confiscate them. Kerr displayed a bad attitude and,
when the jailer turned away, he tossed the shoes at her and hit
her with one..
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
07/12/01 - Kerr sexually assaulted and murdered
Pamela Horton.
09/20/01 - A Tarrant County grand jury indicted Kerr for capital
murder (re-indicted 01/13/03)
03/25/03 - A Tarrant County jury convicted Kerr of capital murder.
03/28/03 - The 297th District Court of Tarrant County sentenced
Kerr to death.
10/20/04 - Kerr filed an original application for a state writ of
habeas corpus.
01/12/05 - The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld Kerr’s
conviction on direct appeal.
08/31/05 - The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Kerr’s
request for habeas relief.
05/30/06 - Kerr filed a petition for a federal writ of habeas
corpus.
12/20/06 - The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed Kerr’s
subsequent application.
09/17/09 - A Fort Worth federal district court denied habeas
relief and issued final judgment.
06/30/10 - The U.S. Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) affirmed denial
of habeas relief.
01/10/11 - The Supreme Court denied Kerr’s petition for certiorari
review.
01/19/11 - The 297th District Court of Tarrant County scheduled
execution for May 3, 2011.
Texas inmate executed using new drug mix
By Tori Brock - ItemOnline.com
May 03, 2011
HUNTSVILLE — Texas used a new three-drug
combination to execute a condemned inmate for the first time
Tuesday. Cary Kerr, 46, of Dallas was pronounced dead at 6:19 p.m.
Tuesday in the death house at the Huntsville Unit, nine minutes
after the administration of a lethal dose of drug that included
for the first time pentobarbital in place of sodium thiopental,
which is no longer available. The state has used sodium thiopental
since 1982.
Just before the lethal dose of drugs began to
flow, Kerr proclaimed his innocence in the 2001 rape and murder of
34-year-old Pamela Horton in Haltom City near Fort Worth. “To the
state of Texas: I'm an innocent man,” Kerr said in his last
statement. “Never trust a court-appointed attorney.” Kerr then
asked his friends to search for the person he claimed committed
the crime. “Check that DNA,” he said. “Check Scott.” As the
sedation drugs began to take effect, Kerr sighed deeply and said,
“Here we go.” “Lord Jesus,” he said. “Jesus.”
Earlier Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused
to block Kerr’s execution. Kerr's appeal didn't challenge the drug
switch. Rather, he argued that a lawyer didn't properly represent
him in earlier appeals, according to the Associated Press.
Kerr told the AP he first met Horton when they
lived in the same trailer park, then ran into her the evening of
July 11, 2001, at a bar where he was celebrating passing the test
to get his commercial truck driving license. "I've never denied
being with her," he said recently from death row. Kerr said he was
"half drunk" and Horton was drunk when he decided to take her to
his place where they had sex and then argued. She left alive, he
insisted.
Authorities said Kerr pushed Horton out of a
moving vehicle after sexually assaulting her, which caused her
death. A taxi driver discovered her body in the street at 2 a.m.
the following morning.
Kerr requested a final meal of pizza, fried
chicken, baked chicken, lasagna, tacos, pork ribs with picante
sauce, cheeseburger, quiche with meat, cheese and broccoli and ice
cream for dessert.
Kerr was the third Texas prisoner executed this
year. The next execution, of Gayland Bradford of Dallas County, is
scheduled June 1.
Texas executes first inmate using drug used
on animals
By Corrie MacLaggan - Reuters.com
May 4, 2011
AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - Texas on Tuesday
carried out its first execution using a sedative often used to
euthanize animals. Cary Kerr, 46, was put to death by lethal
injection for the 2001 sexual assault and strangling of Pamela
Horton.
The new drug, pentobarbital, replaced sodium
thiopental in Texas' three-drug execution protocol. The change was
necessary because Hospira Inc. of Illinois announced in January it
would stop making the sodium thiopental after Italy objected to
Hospira manufacturing an execution drug in that country. That
caused a shortage of the drug throughout the United States. Ohio
and Oklahoma have already switched to use of pentobarbital in
executions.
Another Texas inmate, Cleve Foster, had been
scheduled to be the first person in the state executed using the
new drug last month. But Foster received a temporary stay of
execution from the U.S. Supreme Court over concerns his state-appointed
lawyers were ineffective.
Kerr was pronounced dead at 6:19 p.m. on
Tuesday, said Michelle Lyons, a spokeswoman for the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice. "To the state of Texas: I am an
innocent man," were among Kerr's final words, according to Lyons.
"Never trust a court-appointed attorney. I am ready, warden."
For his last meal, Kerr requested a long list
of food, including lasagna, spaghetti, pizza, fried chicken, baked
chicken, tacos, pork ribs, deep-fried mushrooms, a cheeseburger,
french fries, quiche and ice cream, according to Jason Clark, a
spokesman for the Department.
Kerr was the third prisoner to be put to death
this year in Texas, which executes more prisoners than any other
state. Texas executed 17 people in 2010, down from 24 in 2009.
Cary Kerr
ProDeathPenalty.com
The victim in this case was Pamela Horton.
Although another man was her boyfriend, Pamela had been seen at
bars in Cary D. Kerr's company for about a month. On the evening
of July 11, 2001, Pamela Horton socialized with Jennifer York and
Kerr at a bar called the Swan Club, and the three later moved to a
nearby nightclub called Cowtown. Jennifer briefly danced with Kerr
but when he grabbed her arm as she was walking away, she punched
him. Jennifer did not like Kerr and told Pamela so, but Pamela
defended him as being "a nice guy." Pamela Horton later told
Jennifer that she needed a ride home, but Jennifer was not yet
ready to leave. Pamela was clearly intoxicated. In her testimony,
Jennifer York characterized Pamela Horton as an "impatient" person,
who could be predicted to look for someone else to take her home
immediately, rather than wait until Jennifer was ready. Later, a
bartender noticed Pamela leaving with Kerr. After escorting her
from the nightclub, Kerr returned briefly and whispered to Cathy
Dawson, "I'm taking this drunk bitch home and I'll be right back."
At 2:00 a.m. on July 12, a taxicab driver
spotted Pamela Horton's dead body, lying in the street. The
taxicab driver located an ambulance and notified the paramedics of
the body's location. Pamela was wearing shorts but nothing else:
no shirt, socks, shoes, or underwear. Only the top button of the
shorts' button-fly was fastened. There was "fuzz" on the victim's
feet, indicating the victim had recently worn socks.
After the paramedics had wrapped the victim's
body, Kerr approached them and asked them to pull back the sheet
because he believed he could identify her. The paramedics
responded that they would not pull back the sheet but asked Kerr
to tell them who it was if he knew. Kerr stated that he was the
one who found the body and had called them. The paramedics
responded that no one "called" them; they were on the scene
because they had been approached by a taxicab driver. Kerr then
responded that he had flagged down the taxi. Kerr further stated
that he had not stopped his car upon discovering her body because
he thought she might be a robbery decoy and that he had seen a
black sedan with two male passengers parked nearby. Kerr also
stated that he recognized the woman as someone who frequented bars
in the area.
Police officers arrived at the scene, secured
it, and talked to Kerr. The officers saw a purse in Kerr's car and
asked whose purse it was. Kerr first stated it was the victim's
and then added, "If that's the girl I picked up, maybe it's hers."
The victim's boyfriend would later identify the purse as one he
had bought for her. He became very nervous after this admission.
Kerr retrieved the purse from his vehicle for the officers'
inspection. A broken, comb-like hair clip was attached to the
handle of the purse. During their conversation with Kerr, the
officers noticed a long strand of blonde hair on his face. Kerr
did not have blonde hair but the victim did. One of the officers
took the strand of blonde hair. The officers later arrested Kerr
at the scene. On the way to the police station, Kerr started
kicking the back window of the patrol car and began "cussing" and
saying he was going to get out of the car.
The victim's body exhibited a large number of
injuries, some of which were inflicted before death, and some
after death. Injuries to the victim while she was still alive
included: bruising of the right temple and the top of the right
eye, a bruise on the top side of the left eye or eyelid, tiny
pinpoint bruises on the neck and the collarbone, a bruise on the
chest above the right breast, and bruises on the arms. Also, the
hyoid bone of the neck was fractured. Post-mortem injuries
included abrasions on the trunk of the body, the front part of the
breasts, the abdomen, the left arm, the right leg, and the right
foot. These post-mortem abrasions were "gliding abrasions" that
could be found on someone thrown out of a motor vehicle. It was
determined that the victim also had semen in her mouth. According
to the deputy medical examiner who performed the autopsy, the
bruises on the neck indicated that the cause of death was manual
strangulation and that the death was a homicide. A forensic
anthropologist testified that the broken hyoid bone was also a
sign of manual strangulation. The deputy medical examiner
indicated that the injuries and sexual activity occurred within a
short time of each other, but he conceded in cross-examination
that the physical condition of the body was not inconsistent with
consensual sexual activity followed by a homicide.
DNA testing showed that the semen in the
victim's mouth matched the defendant's DNA profile. The
probability of a match with another person was 1 in 21 trillion
for Caucasians, 1 in 159 trillion for those of African descent,
and 1 in 615 trillion for Southwestern Hispanics. Hair analysis of
the strand of blonde hair picked off Kerr's face showed
similarities to the victim's hair but with enough differences that
the hair examiner could say only that the strand could not be
ruled out as having come from the victim. Pamela's blood alcohol
concentration at the time of autopsy was determined to be 0.465 -
over five times the legal limit. The deputy medical examiner
estimated that the concentration probably had peaked at 0.5 and
was on its way down, and that the victim would have to have been a
"seasoned drinker" to be able walk around with that much alcohol
in her body.
A search of Kerr's home yielded a brassiere,
panties, and a plastic "tooth" for a comb or a hair clasp. The
brassiere was severely torn in two places. In one place there was
a complete separation of the strap from the cups in the front, and
in another place there was a tear on one of the cups at the side.
A forensic examiner testified that the tears were significant
enough to interfere with the brassiere's function, and he
testified that a great deal of force would be required to produce
the tears in question. Examination of the comb-like hair clip
revealed that it had been manufactured with fourteen teeth but
eight had broken off. In addition, part of the gripping surface
was missing and the hinging mechanism was damaged. The comb tooth
retrieved from Kerr's residence was the same color as the hair
clasp, and microscopic analysis showed a match. The forensic
examiner testified that considerable force would be needed to
cause the observed damage to the hair clasp. The brassiere and the
panties contained DNA from the victim.
Pamela Horton's aunt, Joann Mazyck, who said
she helped raise Horton, wished Kerr would at least show some
remorse. "I want him to be punished," she said. "I hate to use 'dead.'
I just want to know he's not here."
Office of Capital Writs Involved in Kerr
Litigation
Standown.typepad.com
UPDATE: Convicted murderer Cary Kerr tonight
became the first Texas inmate to be executed with the state's new
three-drug lethal injection cocktail, including pentobarbital.The
U.S. Supreme Court today denied Kerr's request for a stay.
The Tribune's original story about Kerr's case
is below.
Less than a month before his scheduled
execution, Cary Kerr had no attorney. And the ones he had had up
to that point, he argues, didn’t do him much good. Now, he’s
asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stop his execution — scheduled
for tonight — and allow him another opportunity to argue for his
life. “This was a life history that wasn’t told,” says Brad
Levenson, Kerr’s new attorney. “No one has done this investigation.”
Levenson is director of the state’s new Office
of Capital Writs. Created by lawmakers in 2009 to provide better
representation for people on death row who can't afford to pay
their own lawyers to challenge their sentences, the office opened
in September 2010. Kerr’s case is the first the office has taken
with an impending execution date. And prophetically, the appellate
lawyer whose previous work Kerr lambasts is the same one who
helped spur lawmakers to create the office of writs in the first
place.
Kerr was sentenced to death in 2003 for the
rape and murder of Pamela Horton. He’s not arguing that he didn’t
strangle the woman and leave her badly beaten corpse in the middle
of the street in a Fort Worth suburb. Rather, Kerr says, his
attorneys never gave the jury a chance to hear about his abusive
upbringing and mental problems, a background he believes could
have persuaded jurors or appellate courts to issue a sentence
other than death.
Lawyers for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
argue, however, that Kerr’s original trial lawyer did present
jurors with mitigating evidence. And, they say, the courts have
not recognized that death row inmates have a constitutional right
to effective appellate attorneys.
After he was sentenced, Richard Alley was
appointed as Kerr’s state habeas corpus attorney. The main goal of
habeas proceedings is to uncover new evidence that either proves
the inmate’s innocence or shows a constitutional violation during
trial proceedings. Alley, though, didn’t do any investigating,
Kerr contends. He never even retrieved Kerr’s case file. When he
drafted the habeas pleading, he copied and pasted from older
filings in Kerr’s case and others he had handled. Kerr’s first
name was misspelled on the cover page. One section of the pleading
compared Horton’s murder to “any other shooting death.” Horton was
strangled. The pleading said Kerr’s youth should be a mitigating
factor, but Kerr was 39 at the time of his trial. The petition was
quickly denied.
Levenson argues that Alley should never have
been appointed to handle Kerr’s case because the State Bar of
Texas had twice disciplined him for unethical behavior, including
using false evidence and making false statements. In 2006 —
shortly after an investigative report from the Austin American-Statesman
about the shoddy work of Alley and other death row lawyers — he
was removed from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals list of
capital appointments because of his work on Kerr’s case and others.
And reports about Alley’s work and the troubled capital appellate
system were a major factor that led lawmakers to establish the
office of writs in 2009.
Levenson found out about Kerr from other
lawyers who told him the death row inmate didn’t have an attorney
even though he was about to be executed. Despite having little
time for investigation and a small staff, Levenson says, on April
6, he took on Kerr’s case and delved into his past. “What normally
takes a year and a half, we did in two and a half weeks,” he says.
They interviewed family members, including Kerr’s sister and
stepsister and his biological mother, and talked to Kerr’s friends
and neighbors. They reviewed school and jail records.
The story they found, Levenson says, was
disturbing. Kerr was born to alcoholic parents. His mother left
when he was young, and he was raised mostly by his sister, who was
only a couple of years his senior. His youth was riddled with
poverty, and the children often went hungry. Kerr’s father and
grandfather introduced him to alcohol when he was about 10. He was
sexually assaulted twice, once at age 5 and again at 12. His
stepmother openly disdained him and routinely slapped him in the
face in public. By the time Kerr was a teenager, his father and
stepmother repeatedly kicked him out of the house; at one point he
lived in an old car under a neighbor’s carport.
“This is a pretty sad and traumatic childhood,
and I think a jury should hear all the evidence before they make a
decision,” Levenson says. “We found this in two-and-a-half weeks.
What could competent habeas counsel have found if they had worked
for much longer?”
The primary question in the Kerr case, however,
is whether he even had a right to effective habeas counsel. So far,
the courts have ruled the U.S. Constitution makes no such
guarantee. Recent action by the U.S. Supreme Court have fueled
hopes among defense lawyers that the nation’s top court might be
ready to take up that issue. Last month, the court stayed the
execution of Texas death row inmate Cleve Foster, who has made
similar ineffective counsel claims. The court also stayed the
execution of Daniel Cook in Arizona, another case that raises
questions about ineffective counsel. “For years, people have
wanted that question answered,” Levenson says.
Cary D. Kerr
Todesstrafe-usa.de
About Cary D. Kerr
DOB 10/06/1964
Date of crime 07/12/2001
On death row since April 2003
We mourn about Cary Kerr, executed on May 3, 2011...
The Crime
The victim in this case Ms. Pamela Horton was
found on the side of the road wearing only a pair of cut off blue
jean shorts.
Horton and Cary Kerr lived in the same trailer
park for 5 ˝ months, they both knew each other, they were friends
and they spent time together from time to time. The night Pamela
Horton was murdered, she and Cary had spent some time together
earlier that same evening. They engaged in oral sex “only” and
afterwards Pamela Horton left his home and started walking to her
home at around 12:30 am. She never made it.
Her body was found at 2:05 am halfway between
her home and Cary’s home lying on the side of road. She was beaten,
strangled and then run over by a vehicle according to police
reports and the state prosecution. The police found a tire print
on the upper leg of Ms. Horton and stated that she was run over in
an attempt to cover up the crime.
When the police arrived at the place where Ms.
Horton’s body lay in road, Cary went to the scene and tried to
tell the police that he knew her and that they were even out
together earlier the evening. Cary tried to tell the police about
a dark colored car that was parked close to the body but the
police ignored him and told him to wait in a police car until a
detective arrived. After a detective arrived Cary was allowed to
talk to him and allowed police to search his vehicle. The
detective told Cary that since he was out with the victim earlier
the same night that that was good enough for him. Cary was then
arrested.
After waiting almost two years for a trial,
Cary D. Kerr was convicted in March of 2003, and sentenced to
death by lethal injection.
The Case of the State
The case of Cary D. Kerr is 100% circumstantial
and factually has no evidence that Mr. Kerr committed any crime at
all.
The state prosecutor withheld DNA evidence from
Mr. Kerr’s defense lawyers that showed Mr. Kerr was not the
attacker! Only when a DNA expert testified for the state did
defense attorneys learn about the DNA evidence that excluded Mr.
Kerr from this crime. The state prosecutor told the jury that they
had to disregard this DNA evidence that does not belong to Mr.
Kerr. The prosecution stated that just because it does not match
to him does not mean that it is not his! The prosecution stated,
“don’t even think about it!”
The prosecution told the jury that Mr. Kerr had
just met Ms. Horton that night and preyed upon her because she was
drunk. The prosecution further stated that Mr. Kerr was a lion and
that he has preyed upon women for years and has eluded police for
years. They stated that Mr. Kerr was a serial rapist, a lion
preying on gazelles.
The prosecution told the jury that Mr. Kerr
sexually assaulted Ms. Horton, while beating her with a bloody
club and strangling her to death. He then placed her dead body
into his vehicle and took her out to some remote woods, but before
he could get there Ms. Horton “while dead“ accidentally opened the
car door and fell out onto the street. The prosecutor then stated
that when Ms. Horton fell out of the vehicle Mr. Kerr in an
attempt to cover up the crime ran her body over with his vehicle.
The prosecutor told the jury that the reason they could not find
any evidence of this is because Mr. Kerr went home, took a shower
and then cleaned his home of all evidence!
The lead detective in Mr. Kerr’s case Glen
Diviney has a record of tampering with evidence. Mr. Glen Diviney
testified to going out to Mr. Kerr’s home at 4:00 am to have a
look around. Mr. Diviney did not have a warrant, did not have Mr.
Kerr's permission and was alone. He stated that the door war not
locked, but he did not enter. Ms. Horton’s brassiere was found
torn, laying just inside the door next to Mr. Kerr clean and
folded laundry on the couch. Mr. Glen Diviney was supposed to lead
the search of Mr. Kerr’s home at 7:00 am but for some strange
reason, Mr Diviney did not show up and told crime scene
investigators to go ahead without him.
The jury was not allowed to hear that this
detective has tampered with evidence in other case(s). The trial
judge refused the defense this evidence in Mr. Kerr‘s favor.
Why is Cary Kerr innocent?
There was semen found in the victim’s vagina
that did not match to Cary Kerr. There were skin-cells found on
the victim’s brassiere that did not match to either Mr. Kerr or Ms.
Horton. This proves that someone other than Mr. Kerr attacked and
sexually assaulted Ms. Horton.
There was a blonde hair that police removed
from Mr. Kerr’s beard stubble and trace analyst could not match
this single hair to the victim. This hair was not the same length
as the victim’s hair but only similar in color as being blonde. Ms.
Horton was not the only blonde in the club and Mr. Kerr did dance
with other women, some blonde and some brunette. The tire print
that was found on the victim’s upper leg did not match to any of
Mr. Kerr’s tires on his vehicle.
The victim was beaten bloody with what the
prosecutors called a bloody club. The victim had 26 cuts on her
head and upper body and lost some amount of blood. Police and
crime scene investigators never found any blood or tissue in Mr.
Kerr’s vehicle that was said to be the vehicle that ran Ms. Horton
over. Police and crime scene investigators never found any blood
or tissue on or even under Mr. Kerr’s vehicle. Police and crime
scene investigators never found any blood or tissue at Mr. Kerr’s
home and never found any blood or tissue on Mr. Kerr himself. The
police and crime scene investigators also never found any kind of
weapons, especially this bloody club they said was used by Mr.
Kerr. When Mr. Kerr’s home was searched there were no signs of any
violence and no evidence to support the prosecution's allegations.
An eyewitness told defense investigators that
he seen a white Land Rover stop at where the victim’s body lay in
the road and a white male got out and this white male was about
five foot nine to five foot ten inches in height and had a tattoo
on his left shoulder. Mr. Kerr does not own and was not driving a
white Land Rover and Mr. Kerr is six foot one inch tall and had no
tattoos on either of his shoulders. Mr. Kerr’s vehicle was a Dodge
Raider suv (small 2 door ) and it was blue, silver and black.
During trial the eyewitness changed the color of the “Land Rover”
to blue (only) and stated that the car he had seen was a “Land
Rover” “For Sure a Land Rover”.
The medical examiner, Doctor Konzelman,
testified that he could not determine a sexual assault by Mr. Kerr,
the defendant. The sexual assault was what made this case a
capital case. We have prepared a Fact Sheet with excerpts from the
trial record. These excerpts show the injustice against Cary and
also back up that he was wrongly convicted..
If you are a lawyer or investigator and would
like to look deeper in this case, please contact us and we are
going to send you the complete trial-transcrip as pdf-file: info@alive-gegen-todesstrafe.deThis
e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need
JavaScript enabled to view it
Other Strange Points
The medical examiner testified that Ms. Horton
fought her attacker back and that he found evidence that shows
this, but then went on to testify that he does not know what he
did with the fingernail clippings and scrapings from his
examination. Where is this apparently lost DNA? The lead detective
has a history of TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE and it is on his
employment record as well as in the court record. There was an ex-police
officer that was willing to testified for Mr. Kerr about the
detectives tampering charges. The trial judge did not allow the
jury to hear this information.
Police let a dark colored vehicle leave the
crime scene that was parked close to the body upon their arrival
and the emergency technician (EMT) pointed this vehicle out to
police as suspicious. This is the exact same vehicle that Mr. Kerr
pointed out as well but the police ignored it and allowed it and
the driver to leave without checking on the driver or taking down
information.
The prosecution re-indicted Mr. Kerr 60 days
before trial was to begin adding an additional charge of robbery.
Mr. Kerr was accused of taking a wallet/day planner from the
victim. There was a young woman that sat in the court room with
the victim's family through the entire trial and listened to
several people testify to this missing wallet/day planner
including the victim's family that testified that this wallet/day
planner was missing. At the very end of trial and during the last
break the prosecution told the judge that this young lady has just
approached them and told them that she has had this missing wallet/day
planner for the last 23 months. Why didn’t this young woman come
forward at the beginning of all of this testimony? Because this
was a scheme by the prosecutor to make Mr. Kerr look bad and let
several people testify in order to find the jurors' hearts.
The prosecutor told the trial judge that the
state would like to dismiss the robbery element of the indictment
because of this new news. The trial judge failed to order the jury
that they had to disregard all of the robbery testimony because
the wallet/day planner was in fact never missing.
How was it possible that Cary Kerr got
convicted
Cary D. Kerr was convicted because of over
zealous prosecutors and lazy, poor court appointed attorneys. Mr.
Kerr’s court appointed attorneys did very little to help Mr. Kerr.
They did not do a full investigation of their client's case and
refused to let Mr. Kerr review evidence that the state was going
to use against him. His attorneys told Mr. Kerr that there was no
evidence to review. Mr. Kerr's attorneys also told the jurors
several times that they as defense attorneys do not have to do
anything except just show up. They did not have to prove that Mr.
Kerr is innocent and it is the state's job to prove that Mr. Kerr
broke the law! “All we have to do as Mr. Kerr’s attorneys is just
show up.”
The lead detective in Mr. Kerr’s case stated
that he did not do a full investigation like he was supposed to
have done. He stated: “I should have done a full investigation but
I did not, I wish that I did!” The prosecutors in Mr. Kerr’s case
told the jury they had to disregard DNA evidence that excluded Mr.
Kerr. That they have not to even think about it! The prosecution
further told the jury that Mr. Kerr was a serial rapist. That he
has preyed on women and has eluded police for a long time. This
was a lie and defense attorneys objected to it, but still it was
said and heard by the jury. Mr. Kerr has never been convicted of
any rape, has no history of violence and has no felony convictions.
All in all Cary D. Kerr’s conviction became
possible because the prosecutors in his case lied and mislead the
jury and told jurors to disregard DNA evidence. This violated Mr.
Kerr’s constitutional rights and the laws of the state of Texas.
Mr. Kerr’s court appointed attorneys failed to assist Mr. Kerr
with effective counsel and failed to investigate. In Mr. Kerr’s
case they were unable and/or unwilling to challenge the
prosecutors claims against Mr. Kerr, but they did show up!
Cary D. Kerr needs help! The situation for Cary
Kerr has not changed. He is still represented by an attorney that
is not willing to file a proper appeal. His attorney will not even
respond to Mr. Kerr’s letters or visit with Mr. Kerr. He has
ignored Mr. Kerr’s cries for help completely! His court appointed
federal appeal attorney did not file any of Mr. Kerr’s issues from
the trial. His attorney was supposed to take Mr. Kerr’s case back
into the state courts so that all the issues in Mr. Kerr’s case
including the DNA would be filed. He said he would, but he lied to
Mr. Kerr.
Mr. Kerr’s court appointed state habeas corpus
attorney has refused to correspond with him and also refuses to
visit with him on a legal visit to discuss Mr. Kerr’s case. Mr.
Kerr’s attorney filed the direct appeal as Mr. Kerr habeas corpus
along with verbatim issues that are raised on all of the attorney’s
appeals. Mr. Kerr’s attorney would not file issues that he was
instructed to file by Mr. Kerr himself. His attorney did not raise
the DNA issues or any other issues from Mr. Kerr’s trial. This
attorney has been reported to the Texas state bar over and over
and was suspended by the federal courts for a period of one year
for filing the same type of brief that he filed Mr. Kerr’s case!
Mr. Kerr’s habeas attorney has managed to make himself known to
news papers and magazines. News week magazine did a story on this
attorney back in the year 2000, and the Austin American statesman
has reported on him and his incompetent practice in year 2006.
Cary D. Kerr is 100% innocent of this crime and
has the evidence to prove it! His cries to the courts have been
unheard. His letters to the courts have been unanswered. Cary
needs help! He needs your help! Cary asks for pen-friends that are
willing to give mental support as well as physical. He is
searching for legal support as well. Please don’t let Cary become
another statistic in the Texas Death Penalty Murder Scheme! He has
the evidence to prove his innocence, he just needs help to get
this evidence into the courts.
Please, let us all come together for a good
cause. This cause is called LIFE and it is worth living. If you
would like to contact Cary Kerr personally, you can write to the
address below, if you have questions or need further information
please contact ALIVE e.V. at info@alive-gegen-todesstrafe.de
Cary D. Kerr # 999449
Polunsky Unit
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston, TX 77351 USA
Cary D. Kerr
Deathrow-usa.us
April 23, 2004
How to start? Well, I guess I'll start by
writing a little about myself first. I am a white male of 39 years
of age born October 6th 1964 in Dallas, Texas.
I spent half my childhood in the country with
grandparents. The rest in the Dallas Fortworth area. I am six (6')
foot one and a half (1˝') tall, weigh in @ 224 ibs. I work out
some to stay in good shape. I have brown hair, green eyes. I do
not have a good picture to send or I would send one. Fact is, I do
not have any pictures of myself at all. I enjoy outside activities
such as motorcycling, camping, golf, swimming and lake side
cookouts. I also enjoy writing and I have a good sense of humor.
I would enjoy a pen-friend to write to and to
help me through some of my frustrations.
I have no financial support in order to
purchase writing supplies such as stamps, envelopes, paper and
pens and other much needed supplies such as soaps, toothpaste,
deodorants and a fan or chothes, also snacks and food items. I
also believe in being honest up front. I pray that I receive a pen-friend
that will understand my situation.
I have never been in serious trouble before or
prison, in fact, the worst trouble I have had is a D.W.I. (Driving
while intoxicated) in 1994.
I will also tell you I am 100% innocent of the
crime I was charged with. I am fighting to prove my innocence but
it is very difficult with court appointed attorneys who will not
even write and discuss the case! I have DNA that helps prove my
innocence along with several other facts. The problem is trying to
get that information to the criminal courts by appeal.
All I ask of my pen-friend is a chance. You
then can decide for yourself.
I am seeking a pen-friend male or female that
would not mind helping me in order to write and have a few
supplies. I will write honest letters (No games) and I would like
honesty in return. All I need is a chance to prove myself. Thank
You.
Very Sincerely
Cary D. Kerr # 999449
Polunsky Unit D.R.
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston - Texas 77351 C.A.5 (Tex.),2010
The Houston Chronicle
July 1, 2010
HOUSTON — A federal appeals court has denied an
appeal from a Dallas man condemned for the 2001 beating and
strangling of a woman he'd been seeing in Tarrant County bars.
Attorneys for convicted killer Cary Kerr told
the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that his indictment was
flawed, plus instructions to jurors during the punishment phase of
his Fort Worth trial in Fort Worth were improper. He also
challenged the state's use of pancuronium bromide in lethal
injections as unconstitutionally cruel.
The appeals court Wednesday refused his
arguments.
The 45-year-old Kerr was convicted of the July
2001 slaying of Pamela Horton. Evidence showed she had been
sexually assaulted and was tossed out of a car after she was
killed.
Kerr does not have an execution date.
Kerr v. Thaler, 384 Fed.Appx. 400
(5th Cir.) (Habeas)
Background: Defendant convicted of capital
murder in Texas state court filed petition for federal habeas
relief. The United States District Court for the Northern District
of Texas, Terry R. Means, J., 2009 WL 2981906, denied petition,
and defendant applied for certificate of appealability (COA).
Holdings: The Court of Appeals held that: (1)
capital murder defendant had no Fifth or Fourteenth Amendment
right to grand jury indictment; (2) defendant's Sixth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights were not violated when jury was not
instructed that it would have to find lack of mitigation beyond
reasonable doubt; (3) defendant had no Eighth Amendment or due
process right to have jurors instructed on consequences of failing
to agree on special issues alleged at punishment phase of case;
and (4) grant of federal habeas relief to defendant convicted of
murder and sentenced to death in Texas state court, on theory that
wording of Texas's future dangerousness special issue was
unconstitutionally vague, would amount to a prohibited retroactive
application of rule of constitutional law not yet announced at
time defendant's conviction became final, in violation Teague anti-retroactivity
doctrine. Denied.
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has
determined that this opinion should not be published and is not
precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th
Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Cary Kerr (spelled “Carey Kerr” in some court
records) was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death.
Kerr brought an application for a writ of habeas corpus in the
appropriate federal district court. The application was denied and
so was a Certificate of Appealability (“COA”). Upon review of his
application here, we also DENY a COA.
In March of 2003, a jury in Tarrant County,
Texas convicted Kerr of sexually assaulting and murdering Pamela
Horton. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Kerr's
conviction. During the pendency of his appeal, Kerr sought a writ
of habeas corpus in a Texas trial court, which was denied.
Subsequently, he petitioned the district court for habeas relief
under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court determined that Kerr had not
made an adequate showing of entitlement to a writ of habeas
corpus. It further denied a COA.
In order to appeal the district court's denial
of habeas relief, a petitioner must obtain a COA either from the
district court or from this court. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). We
will grant a COA only if the petitioner makes “a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” Id. §
2253(c)(2). That showing requires a petitioner to “demonstrate
that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment
of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931
(2003) (citation omitted). When habeas relief is denied on
procedural grounds, “a COA should issue when the prisoner shows,
at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether
the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a
constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it
debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural
ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146
L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). “Any doubt regarding whether to grant a COA is
resolved in favor of the petitioner, and the severity of the
penalty may be considered in making this determination.” ShisInday
v. Quarterman, 511 F.3d 514, 520 (5th Cir.2007) (citation omitted).
Kerr seeks a COA on the grounds that his
constitutional rights were violated in these ways: (1) the
indictment failed to set forth aggravating factors later submitted
as special issues; (2) the prosecution was not required to
disprove mitigation beyond a reasonable doubt; (3) the grand jury
was not required to consider the aggravating factors warranting
the capital murder charge; (4) the instructions did not inform the
jury of the consequences of its failure to agree on a special
issue; (5) the trial court rejected Petitioner's requested jury
charge on a special issue relating to future dangerousness; (6)
the future dangerousness special issue did not properly charge the
burden of proof; and (7) the current method of execution by lethal
injection violates the Eighth Amendment.
We will group some of his arguments for
analysis.
A. Defects in the Indictment
Kerr's first and third claims allege
deficiencies in the indictment. Specifically, Kerr asserts that
his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated because
the indictment failed to allege aggravating factors that were
later submitted to the jury in the punishment phase of his trial.
Kerr relies on the Fifth Amendment's right to a grand jury
indictment in support of this argument. He also cites one of our
decisions which held that aggravating factors rendering a
defendant eligible for the death penalty in a federal prosecution
must be stated in the indictment. See United States v. Robinson,
367 F.3d 278, 288 (5th Cir.2004).
As the district court noted, however, the right
to a grand jury indictment has not been extended to the States
through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S.
266, 272, 114 S.Ct. 807, 127 L.Ed.2d 114 (1994). Indeed, in
Robinson, we addressed only the requirement of a grand jury
indictment in a federal prosecution. See Robinson, 367 F.3d at
288. Although Kerr argues that the grand jury clause “could and
should be” extended to the states, neither the Supreme Court nor
this court has done so to date.
To the extent that Kerr argues that the
inadequate indictment impermissibly expands the prosecutor's
discretion to seek the death penalty, he has not identified any
precedent depriving state prosecutors of that discretion.
Accordingly, reasonable jurists would not find the district
court's resolution of these claims to be debatable or wrong.
B. Burden of Proof for the Mitigation
Special Issue
Kerr alleges that his Sixth and Fourteenth
Amendment rights to a jury trial were violated because the State
was not required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that no
sufficient mitigating evidence warranted a sentence less than
death. In Texas, once a defendant is found guilty of capital
murder, the jury must answer two special issues unanimously to
impose death. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 37.071 § 2. The
first assesses the “future dangerousness” of the defendant, which
the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. §
2(c). The jury is asked “[w]hether there is a probability that the
defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would
constitute a continuing threat to society.” Id. § 2(b)(1). If
answered in the affirmative, the jury next addresses issues of
mitigation, asking “whether, taking into consideration all of the
evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the
defendant's character and background, and the personal moral
culpability of the defendant, there is a sufficient mitigating
circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life
imprisonment without parole rather than a death sentence be
imposed.” Id. § 2(e)(1). The mitigation issue assigns no burden of
proof. If the jury answers “yes,” the defendant receives a life
sentence. Id. § 2(g) If it answers “no,” the punishment is death.
Id.
Relying on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.
466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and Ring v. Arizona,
536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), Kerr asserts
that a jury must be required to find a lack of mitigation beyond a
reasonable doubt in order to impose death. We disagree. We have
previously addressed the necessity of an assigned burden of proof
for the mitigation special issue in Texas's death penalty scheme.
See Rowell v. Dretke, 398 F.3d 370, 376-78 (5th Cir.2005). We
observed in Rowell that no Supreme Court or Circuit precedent
requires mitigation to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.
Consequently, we concluded that relief was not available under the
AEDPA standard. Id. Kerr's claim in this regard is foreclosed. See
also Avila v. Quarterman, 560 F.3d 299, 314-15 (5th Cir.2009) (finding
that the court was bound by precedent to reject petitioner's
argument that the jury was required to find a lack of mitigating
evidence beyond a reasonable doubt).
C. Jury Instructions About Failure to Agree
on a Special Issue
Kerr claims that his due process rights, as
well as his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, required that
the jury be instructed on the consequences of failing to agree on
the special issues alleged in the punishment phase. The crux of
Kerr's complaint is that jurors were not informed that a single
“hold-out” juror could prevent the imposition of the death penalty
and effectuate a life sentence. The Texas sentencing scheme
requires a unanimous “yes” as to the future dangerousness issue
and a unanimous “no” on the mitigation issue in order to impose
the death penalty. Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 37.071 § 2(d)(2)
& (e). The statute also requires that ten or more jurors vote
together to answer the future dangerousness issue “no” or the
mitigation issue “yes”-either of which would result in a life
sentence. Id. The statutory instruction does not inform the jury
that a failure to meet the “ten vote” requirement results in a de
facto life sentence.
The Supreme Court has previously rejected this
argument. Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373, 381-83, 119 S.Ct.
2090, 144 L.Ed.2d 370 (1999). The Court concluded that a jury need
not be told what happens procedurally when a verdict cannot be
reached. While the jury may not be “affirmatively misled regarding
its role in the sentencing process,” a court is not required to
instruct the jury “as to the consequences of a breakdown in the
deliberative process.” Id. at 381-82, 119 S.Ct. 2090. The
instruction in this case accurately recited the governing law.
Kerr's claim that the court's failure to instruct the jury on the
effect of a deadlock is without merit.
D. Denial of Kerr's Requested Jury
Instruction on the Future Dangerousness Special Issue
Kerr's habeas petition argued that the trial
court improperly rejected Kerr's requested jury charge on the
burden of proof for the future dangerousness special issue in
violation of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
However, Kerr has not identified where in the record he requested
a special instruction on this issue nor an instance where the
court rejected it. He also did not argue on direct appeal or when
seeking state habeas relief that any such instruction was refused.
Habeas relief is precluded where the applicant has not exhausted
his state court remedies. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). Kerr's claim is
therefore unexhausted and procedurally barred.
E. The Burden of Proof on the Future
Dangerousness Special Issue
Kerr further asserts that the use of the word
“probability” in the future dangerousness special issue
impermissibly lowers the State's burden of proof. As previously
discussed, the State must prove future dangerousness beyond a
reasonable doubt. The word “probability,” Kerr claims, is
unconstitutionally vague.
Kerr cites no authority supporting his theory
that reasonable jurists could disagree that the wording of the
special issue lowers the burden of proof. A claim not adequately
briefed is deemed abandoned. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222,
224-25 (5th Cir.1993). Moreover, we have previously refused to
entertain an identical argument, because its application would
violate the anti-retroactivity doctrine of Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S.
288, 316, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989). See Rowell, 398
F.3d at 377-78. Pursuant to Teague, Kerr may not obtain habeas
relief based on rules of constitutional law not yet announced at
the time his conviction became final. Teague, 489 U.S. at 310, 109
S.Ct. 1060. Granting relief here would require retroactive
application of a new rule of constitutional law on federal habeas
review. Because no court has previously found the wording of
Texas's future dangerousness special issue to be
unconstitutionally vague, Kerr is not entitled to relief.
F. The State's Use of Pancuronium Bromide in
its Execution Process
In his final argument, Kerr insists that
Texas's use of pancuronium bromide in the lethal injection process
violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and
unusual punishment. This claim is foreclosed by the Supreme
Court's decision in Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35, 128 S.Ct. 1520, 170
L.Ed.2d 420 (2008), in which the Court upheld the
constitutionality of using pancuronium bromide in lethal
injections. Kerr's argument is thus without merit.
Kerr has not demonstrated that reasonable
jurists would debate the district court's resolution of his claims.
Accordingly, we DENY a COA