Addison Death Penalty Appeal Gets Skeptical Reception From NH Supreme Court

By Damien Fisher, NH Journal

A skeptical New Hampshire Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in convicted cop killer Michael Addison’s latest death penalty appeal.

Addison became New Hampshire’s only death row inmate for the 2006 murder of Manchester Police Officer Michael Briggs. He argues the state’s 2019 death penalty repeal should apply to him. When the law was passed, lawmakers specifically stipulated the repeal would not extend to Addison.

This execution carve-out for one man is a prime example that New Hampshire’s now-defunct death penalty is being applied unfairly, according to Addison’s attorney, Michael Wiseman. The fact the 2019 repeal was crafted to leave Addison on death row shows lawmakers wanted retribution against Addison even as they acknowledged the death penalty needed to end, Wiseman said.

But the court seemed reluctant to adopt Wiseman’s legal position during Thursday’s oral arguments. Senior Associate Justice Patrick Donovan asked why the court should overturn the plain text of the repeal law, which is presumed to represent the will of the people.

“Do you acknowledge that the legislature explicitly decided to apply the repeal retroactively?” Donovan asked.

Wiseman pointed to statements made during the 2019 debate, including by then-Attorney General Gordon MacDonald, who said the repeal should apply retroactively.

“As current Chief Justice, and former Attorney General, at the time, [Gordon] MacDonald said in his memo to the Senate Judiciary Committee with respect to the predecessor bill, which was identical to the bill before this court, he said, ‘the death penalty repeal signals that society is determined that the death penalty no longer comports to contemporary standards, is no longer necessary, and no longer serves any legitimate purpose, i.e., it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, and therefore the complete and immediate prohibition against executions is required,’” Wiseman said.

MacDonald was not at Thursday morning’s hearing, having been disqualified from the case. The court’s newest member, Associate Justice Daniel Will — the former state solicitor general — is also disqualified.

Assistant Attorney General Audriana Mekula told the justices the appeal runs counter to the repeal law. Addison already had his death sentence reviewed by the Supreme Court, which upheld it in 2015.

“When you look at [the law], it says that when the death penalty is imposed, the judgment of both the conviction and the sentence shall be subject to automatic review. It doesn’t say an automatic review. It doesn’t say multiple automatic reviews. It contemplates one automatic review to happen within 60 days or within a very quick amount of time,” Mekula said.

While Wiseman argued that, because of the 2019 repeal, any person convicted in the future of killing a police officer would not face the death penalty Addison is awaiting, Mekula said that is not necessarily true. The legislature could reinstate the death penalty at any time, and there were several unsuccessful attempts this year to do so.

“It’s entirely possible next year we will have another death penalty,” Mekula said.

Gov. Kelly Ayotte, who prosecuted Addison and secured his death sentence in 2008, is pushing to reinstate the penalty.

Addison was in the middle of a violent crime spree when he shot and killed Briggs, according to court records. He took part in two armed robberies with his partner, Antoine Bell-Rogers, and the pair was linked to a shooting outside a Manchester apartment building the day before Briggs’ murder.

Manchester police obtained arrest warrants for Addison and Bell-Rogers, and the two men were preparing to leave the state. In the hours before Officer Briggs was killed, Addison was reportedly anticipating a confrontation.

“A friend warned the men that the police were nearby looking for them; [Addison] and Bell-Rogers responded by declaring that they were ‘out for blood,’” a police report filed in court states.

Briggs left behind a wife and two young sons.

This story was originally published by the NH Journal, an online news publication dedicated to providing fair, unbiased reporting on, and analysis of, political news of interest to New Hampshire. For more stories from the NH Journal, visit NHJournal.com.