Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 19, 2006 17:30:02 GMT -5
States Await Ruling on Use of Lethal Injection
Clarence E. Hill was strapped to a gurney last winter, a few moments from
death, when the United States Supreme Court halted his execution.
Mr. Hill had claimed that Floridas lethal injection method caused so much
pain that it violated the Constitutions ban on cruel and unusual
punishment. The Supreme Court said in June that the federal district court
in Tallahassee had to consider the argument on procedural grounds. That
cleared the way for death row inmates around the country to file lawsuits
that would otherwise have been prohibited by tight restrictions on
petitions for habeas corpus.
But last month, before the district court could review the case, Gov. Jeb
Bush rescheduled Mr. Hills death for Sept. 20. Then, to the surprise of
death penalty opponents who thought the district court would take
testimony on the states lethal injection method, the court swiftly
rejected the case again. In Atlanta, the United States Court of Appeals
for the 11th Circuit upheld the decision last week.
Now, with Mr. Hill scheduled to die Wednesday, he has again appealed to
the Supreme Court. And lawyers on both sides of the debate are waiting to
see how his case may affect the way lethal drugs are administered in 37
states.
Courts in California and Missouri have allowed extensive hearings this
year on the lethal injection process, delaying executions until they can
study the question of just how painful the current methods are.
Oklahoma recently changed its protocol so that the condemned receive more
anesthesia before they are killed, and a federal judge in North Carolina
ordered that a brain monitor be used to make sure an inmate was
unconscious when the final drug was given. South Dakota delayed its first
execution in 59 years last month after Gov. Michael Rounds said lawmakers
needed time to review lethal injection protocols.
Other states, including Texas and Virginia, have continued to execute
inmates since the Supreme Courts ruling on the Hill case without holding
evidentiary hearings on the specific procedures and combinations of
chemicals used.
"Nationally there is an inconsistency in the review of lethal injection
challenges," said Richard C. Dieter, executive director of the Death
Penalty Information Center, a research group that opposes capital
punishment. "If the Florida case was that serious for the Supreme Court, I
would think at a minimum in Florida they would hold an evidentiary hearing
to hear from both sides about whether there are particular problems."
The case of Mr. Hill, who killed a police officer in a 1982 robbery in
Pensacola, is peaking days after the American Bar Association called for
substantial changes in Floridas death penalty laws. In March, the Florida
Supreme Court urged the Legislature to require jury decisions to be
unanimous in capital cases. Florida is one of the few states without such
a rule.
Florida switched to lethal injection in 2000 after flames shot from an
inmates head during his execution by electric chair.
When he reinstated Mr. Hill's death warrant last month, Governor Bush said
in a letter to prison officials that the stay from the Supreme Court had
expired. But Mr. Hill's lawyer, D. Todd Doss, said Mr. Bush, a Republican
who supports the death penalty, could instead have filed a motion to
accelerate the rehearing of the case.
On Monday, Mr. Bush said the delays in Mr. Hill's case had made "a
mockery" of the judicial system.
"The challenges have been exhausted," he told reporters in Tallahassee.
"Unless there's other challenges, I have a duty to sign death warrants,
and the system has a duty to carry out the sentence."
Like most other death-penalty states, Florida uses a combination of 3
chemicals in lethal injection: 1 to anesthetize the inmate, a 2nd to
paralyze the body and a 3rd to stop the heart. Mr. Hill, 48, has based his
case on a 2005 study published in the British medical journal The Lancet
that concluded that the anesthetic could wear off before an inmate died.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Mr. Hills case in June, saying that
inmates facing execution by lethal injection could invoke a federal civil
rights law to challenge the state's choice of drugs and the manner in
which they are administered.
In rejecting Mr. Hill's civil rights claim a second time, a 3-judge panel
of the 11th Circuit court in Atlanta said he had waited too long to file
it he did so 4 days before he was to be executed in January and was
merely trying to stall.
Mr. Hill's complaint charged that Florida had adopted its lethal injection
procedure without medical research or expertise; that "unqualified" prison
officials carried it out; and that the drugs used would "create a
dangerous likelihood that Mr. Hill will be conscious throughout the
execution process and, as a result, will experience an excruciatingly
painful and protracted death."
Mr. Doss, his lawyer, said he had hoped for a hearing in which witnesses
could testify to whether Florida's method of lethal injection caused undue
pain. But Carolyn M. Snurkowski, assistant deputy attorney general for
Florida, said the Supreme Court had made no such guarantee.
"No one has thus far suggested that he is entitled to any kind of
hearing," Ms. Snurkowski said. "The Supreme Court said the equities lie
with the state, and if hes too late in filing this, he might not have a
vehicle by which he can get relief."
In California, a federal judge is to review the state's lethal injection
method in a hearing scheduled to start next week and is to decide whether
it presents an unacceptable risk of inflicting extreme pain in violation
of the Eighth Amendment. And in Missouri, a federal judge ruled last week
that a new protocol for lethal injection still fell short of providing
constitutional protections, preventing executions there.
"Whether we win or lose," Mr. Doss said, "it's not going to go away. Each
and every person coming up behind us is going to raise this issue."
(source: New York Times)
Clarence E. Hill was strapped to a gurney last winter, a few moments from
death, when the United States Supreme Court halted his execution.
Mr. Hill had claimed that Floridas lethal injection method caused so much
pain that it violated the Constitutions ban on cruel and unusual
punishment. The Supreme Court said in June that the federal district court
in Tallahassee had to consider the argument on procedural grounds. That
cleared the way for death row inmates around the country to file lawsuits
that would otherwise have been prohibited by tight restrictions on
petitions for habeas corpus.
But last month, before the district court could review the case, Gov. Jeb
Bush rescheduled Mr. Hills death for Sept. 20. Then, to the surprise of
death penalty opponents who thought the district court would take
testimony on the states lethal injection method, the court swiftly
rejected the case again. In Atlanta, the United States Court of Appeals
for the 11th Circuit upheld the decision last week.
Now, with Mr. Hill scheduled to die Wednesday, he has again appealed to
the Supreme Court. And lawyers on both sides of the debate are waiting to
see how his case may affect the way lethal drugs are administered in 37
states.
Courts in California and Missouri have allowed extensive hearings this
year on the lethal injection process, delaying executions until they can
study the question of just how painful the current methods are.
Oklahoma recently changed its protocol so that the condemned receive more
anesthesia before they are killed, and a federal judge in North Carolina
ordered that a brain monitor be used to make sure an inmate was
unconscious when the final drug was given. South Dakota delayed its first
execution in 59 years last month after Gov. Michael Rounds said lawmakers
needed time to review lethal injection protocols.
Other states, including Texas and Virginia, have continued to execute
inmates since the Supreme Courts ruling on the Hill case without holding
evidentiary hearings on the specific procedures and combinations of
chemicals used.
"Nationally there is an inconsistency in the review of lethal injection
challenges," said Richard C. Dieter, executive director of the Death
Penalty Information Center, a research group that opposes capital
punishment. "If the Florida case was that serious for the Supreme Court, I
would think at a minimum in Florida they would hold an evidentiary hearing
to hear from both sides about whether there are particular problems."
The case of Mr. Hill, who killed a police officer in a 1982 robbery in
Pensacola, is peaking days after the American Bar Association called for
substantial changes in Floridas death penalty laws. In March, the Florida
Supreme Court urged the Legislature to require jury decisions to be
unanimous in capital cases. Florida is one of the few states without such
a rule.
Florida switched to lethal injection in 2000 after flames shot from an
inmates head during his execution by electric chair.
When he reinstated Mr. Hill's death warrant last month, Governor Bush said
in a letter to prison officials that the stay from the Supreme Court had
expired. But Mr. Hill's lawyer, D. Todd Doss, said Mr. Bush, a Republican
who supports the death penalty, could instead have filed a motion to
accelerate the rehearing of the case.
On Monday, Mr. Bush said the delays in Mr. Hill's case had made "a
mockery" of the judicial system.
"The challenges have been exhausted," he told reporters in Tallahassee.
"Unless there's other challenges, I have a duty to sign death warrants,
and the system has a duty to carry out the sentence."
Like most other death-penalty states, Florida uses a combination of 3
chemicals in lethal injection: 1 to anesthetize the inmate, a 2nd to
paralyze the body and a 3rd to stop the heart. Mr. Hill, 48, has based his
case on a 2005 study published in the British medical journal The Lancet
that concluded that the anesthetic could wear off before an inmate died.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Mr. Hills case in June, saying that
inmates facing execution by lethal injection could invoke a federal civil
rights law to challenge the state's choice of drugs and the manner in
which they are administered.
In rejecting Mr. Hill's civil rights claim a second time, a 3-judge panel
of the 11th Circuit court in Atlanta said he had waited too long to file
it he did so 4 days before he was to be executed in January and was
merely trying to stall.
Mr. Hill's complaint charged that Florida had adopted its lethal injection
procedure without medical research or expertise; that "unqualified" prison
officials carried it out; and that the drugs used would "create a
dangerous likelihood that Mr. Hill will be conscious throughout the
execution process and, as a result, will experience an excruciatingly
painful and protracted death."
Mr. Doss, his lawyer, said he had hoped for a hearing in which witnesses
could testify to whether Florida's method of lethal injection caused undue
pain. But Carolyn M. Snurkowski, assistant deputy attorney general for
Florida, said the Supreme Court had made no such guarantee.
"No one has thus far suggested that he is entitled to any kind of
hearing," Ms. Snurkowski said. "The Supreme Court said the equities lie
with the state, and if hes too late in filing this, he might not have a
vehicle by which he can get relief."
In California, a federal judge is to review the state's lethal injection
method in a hearing scheduled to start next week and is to decide whether
it presents an unacceptable risk of inflicting extreme pain in violation
of the Eighth Amendment. And in Missouri, a federal judge ruled last week
that a new protocol for lethal injection still fell short of providing
constitutional protections, preventing executions there.
"Whether we win or lose," Mr. Doss said, "it's not going to go away. Each
and every person coming up behind us is going to raise this issue."
(source: New York Times)