A new analysis from the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) reveals a disturbing pattern in the U.S. death penalty system: individuals sentenced to death four or more times for the same crime often find themselves caught in a cycle of prosecutorial misconduct, constitutional violations, and taxpayer expense—only to ultimately be resentenced to life or less.
The report focuses on 14 individuals sentenced to death at least four times for the same offense, identifying systemic prosecutorial abuses including racial bias in jury selection, use of false or undisclosed testimony, and inflammatory arguments in court. In over 600 capital cases, DPIC found that courts overturned convictions or sentences due to misconduct. In nine of the 14 cases examined, courts, juries, or prosecutors ultimately concluded that life imprisonment was more appropriate. Many cases consumed decades of court time and millions of taxpayer dollars.
Curtis Flowers, whose case gained national attention, is one of the clearest examples. Tried six times for the same crime by Mississippi prosecutor Doug Evans and sentenced to death four times, Flowers was ultimately exonerated after the U.S. Supreme Court reversed his conviction in 2019, citing “a blatant pattern” of racial discrimination. Evans struck 41 of 42 Black jurors across Flowers’ six trials. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, said, “The State’s relentless, determined effort to rid the jury of black individuals strongly suggests that the State wanted to try Flowers before an all-white jury.”
Mississippi’s own courts had overturned Flowers’ first three convictions due to prosecutorial misconduct and discriminatory jury selection. His fourth and fifth trials resulted in hung juries. In the sixth trial, the U.S. Supreme Court found the prosecution violated Batson v. Kentucky, a precedent that prohibits racial discrimination in jury selection. After 22 years on death row, Flowers received Mississippi’s maximum compensation of $500,000 for his wrongful incarceration.
Another case, that of Lacey Mark Sivak in Idaho, involved jailhouse informants who later admitted to lying in exchange for leniency. The prosecution withheld letters showing they intervened to reduce the informants’ sentences. In 2011, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the only direct evidence implicating Sivak came from these unreliable sources and held that his constitutional rights had been violated. Sivak was eventually resentenced to life without parole. Prosecutors acknowledged, “We’re satisfied that this is the right thing,” and noted the victim’s family supported the life sentence.
In Alabama, Phillip Tomlin faced the death penalty four times despite unanimous jury recommendations for life imprisonment. Courts repeatedly overturned his sentences for prosecutorial misconduct and juror deception. Prosecutors, at various points, implied judicial endorsement of their evidence, elicited prejudicial testimony, and commented on the defendant’s silence. One juror withheld information about his criminal record and victim status in another case. Tomlin was finally resentenced to life without parole in 2004.
The report also details the case of Jerry Jerome Smith, who has been sentenced to death five times and remains on Alabama’s death row. Prosecutors excluded all 11 Black jurors during one trial and disproportionately questioned and removed Black jurors in another, raising serious equal protection concerns. Despite multiple reversals, Smith remains at risk of execution.
In Mississippi, Richard Gerald Jordan is scheduled to be executed on June 25—nearly 50 years after his original sentence and after three prior death sentences were overturned. Prosecutors once agreed Jordan’s crime did not warrant death, citing his remorse, Vietnam War service, and good prison behavior. Yet after a procedural reversal, prosecutors sought and secured a fourth death sentence, a move three Supreme Court justices criticized as potentially “vindictive.” At 79, Jordan would become one of the oldest people executed in modern U.S. history.
These cases underscore a troubling truth: prosecutorial misconduct is not a rare flaw in the death penalty system, but a recurring feature. DPIC notes that such misconduct includes “racial discrimination against jurors, knowingly allowing witnesses to lie on the stand, withholding evidence from the defense that points to innocence, or making bad-faith arguments to jurors.”
Beyond the human cost is the financial burden. Capital punishment is significantly more expensive than life imprisonment, often costing states two to five times more per case. Contributing factors include longer trials, mandatory appeals, special defense teams, and the high cost of executions. In the 14 highlighted cases, at least 43 capital trials or sentencing proceedings were ultimately unnecessary, as life sentences, commutations, or exonerations followed years of litigation.
DPIC concludes: “It is a simple fact that seeking the death penalty is more expensive. There is not one credible study, to our knowledge, that presents evidence to the contrary.” These costs are compounded when prosecutors pursue new death sentences even after their own misconduct invalidates earlier ones.
As debates over capital punishment continue across the country, the DPIC report raises pressing questions about justice, fairness, and fiscal responsibility. Why do some prosecutors, in the face of repeated misconduct findings, continue to pursue death? What does it mean for a system when life sentences are the end result of dozens of costly, flawed proceedings?
For many of these individuals—like Curtis Flowers and Lacey Mark Sivak—the answer is clear: the pursuit of death became more about prosecutorial determination than justice. For the rest—like Jerry Jerome Smith and Richard Jordan—the consequences may yet prove fatal.
