Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 19, 2006 17:43:35 GMT -5
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT: Erin Wallace---202-289-2275
ewallace@deathpenaltyinfo.org
September 15, 2006:
Inconsistency Prevails in Lethal Injection Controversy----Many Inmates
Executed While Others Are Spared
Florida Case That Was Subject of Supreme Court Review Now on Fast Track
for Execution on September 20
Despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court stopped Clarence Hill's
execution at the 11th hour and unanimously ruled that he could pursue his
challenge to Florida's lethal injection process, the state has set an
execution date of September 20, and the lower courts have denied him an
evidentiary hearing.
In other states, a far different scenario is playing out. All executions
are on hold in California where a federal judge plans extensive hearings
on the lethal injection issue beginning September 26. Similarly, a federal
judge in Missouri has continued the hold on executions in that state at
least until October 27. He has ordered the state to devise a better plan
for carrying out executions. Federal judges in Delaware and Arkansas have
stayed executions this year because of the lethal injection controversy. A
state court in New Jersey put all executions on hold in 2004 because of
this same issue. The governor of South Dakota stepped in at the last
minute to halt an execution there, and has asked that the legislature
amend the state law on lethal injections.
In Oklahoma, the 1st state to adopt the lethal injection method of
execution, the protocol has recently been changed. Similarly, North
Carolina recently revised its procedures as a result of challenges to
their execution process.
However, in other states, despite similar lethal injection challenges,
executions have proceeded on schedule. Texas has executed 21 people by
lethal injection this year, half of all executions in the country.
A federal judge in a Tennessee case, commenting on the wide disparity of
court responses to lethal injection challenges, pointed to the
arbitrariness of these rulings:
[T]he dysfunctional patchwork of stays and executions going on in this
country further undermines the various states' effectiveness and ability
to properly carry out death sentences. We are currently operating under a
system wherein condemned inmates are bringing nearly identical challenges
to the lethal injection procedure. In some instances stays are granted,
while in others they are not and the defendants are executed, with no
principled distinction to justify such a result.
(Alley v. Little, No. 06-5650 (6th Cir. May 16, 2006) (Martin, J.,
dissenting from denial of a rehearing en banc)).
Clarence Hill was about to be executed in Florida when the U.S. Supreme
Court granted him a stay in January of this year. The Court unanimously
ruled in June that he was entitled to bring his lethal injection challenge
as a civil rights matter in federal court. Despite a previous policy of
not setting execution dates until the Hill matter was resolved, Gov. Jeb
Bush signed a death warrant for Hill with an execution date of September
20. Hill's attorney, Todd Doss, was then informed by the federal District
Court that he had less than 24 hours to prepare for a hearing on his
request for a stay of execution. The request was summarily denied on
September 1 without an evidentiary hearing on the lethal injection issue.
An appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit is pending.
Richard Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information
Center, noted: "30 years after the death penalty was reinstated, the
likelihood of the death penalty being carried out is still like being
struck by lightning. A punishment applied in an arbitrary fashion is a
violation of the constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishments."
For further information or to schedule an interview with Richard Dieter,
DPIC's Executive Director, call Erin Wallace at (202) 289-2275 or e-mail
her at ewallace@deathpenaltyinfo.org.
(source: DPIC)
CONTACT: Erin Wallace---202-289-2275
ewallace@deathpenaltyinfo.org
September 15, 2006:
Inconsistency Prevails in Lethal Injection Controversy----Many Inmates
Executed While Others Are Spared
Florida Case That Was Subject of Supreme Court Review Now on Fast Track
for Execution on September 20
Despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court stopped Clarence Hill's
execution at the 11th hour and unanimously ruled that he could pursue his
challenge to Florida's lethal injection process, the state has set an
execution date of September 20, and the lower courts have denied him an
evidentiary hearing.
In other states, a far different scenario is playing out. All executions
are on hold in California where a federal judge plans extensive hearings
on the lethal injection issue beginning September 26. Similarly, a federal
judge in Missouri has continued the hold on executions in that state at
least until October 27. He has ordered the state to devise a better plan
for carrying out executions. Federal judges in Delaware and Arkansas have
stayed executions this year because of the lethal injection controversy. A
state court in New Jersey put all executions on hold in 2004 because of
this same issue. The governor of South Dakota stepped in at the last
minute to halt an execution there, and has asked that the legislature
amend the state law on lethal injections.
In Oklahoma, the 1st state to adopt the lethal injection method of
execution, the protocol has recently been changed. Similarly, North
Carolina recently revised its procedures as a result of challenges to
their execution process.
However, in other states, despite similar lethal injection challenges,
executions have proceeded on schedule. Texas has executed 21 people by
lethal injection this year, half of all executions in the country.
A federal judge in a Tennessee case, commenting on the wide disparity of
court responses to lethal injection challenges, pointed to the
arbitrariness of these rulings:
[T]he dysfunctional patchwork of stays and executions going on in this
country further undermines the various states' effectiveness and ability
to properly carry out death sentences. We are currently operating under a
system wherein condemned inmates are bringing nearly identical challenges
to the lethal injection procedure. In some instances stays are granted,
while in others they are not and the defendants are executed, with no
principled distinction to justify such a result.
(Alley v. Little, No. 06-5650 (6th Cir. May 16, 2006) (Martin, J.,
dissenting from denial of a rehearing en banc)).
Clarence Hill was about to be executed in Florida when the U.S. Supreme
Court granted him a stay in January of this year. The Court unanimously
ruled in June that he was entitled to bring his lethal injection challenge
as a civil rights matter in federal court. Despite a previous policy of
not setting execution dates until the Hill matter was resolved, Gov. Jeb
Bush signed a death warrant for Hill with an execution date of September
20. Hill's attorney, Todd Doss, was then informed by the federal District
Court that he had less than 24 hours to prepare for a hearing on his
request for a stay of execution. The request was summarily denied on
September 1 without an evidentiary hearing on the lethal injection issue.
An appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit is pending.
Richard Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information
Center, noted: "30 years after the death penalty was reinstated, the
likelihood of the death penalty being carried out is still like being
struck by lightning. A punishment applied in an arbitrary fashion is a
violation of the constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishments."
For further information or to schedule an interview with Richard Dieter,
DPIC's Executive Director, call Erin Wallace at (202) 289-2275 or e-mail
her at ewallace@deathpenaltyinfo.org.
(source: DPIC)