Publications
Death Penalty Cases
Greetings, Court Fans!
ย
So much for the Court going on recess โ it’s been a more eventful week than one would expect, thanks to a flurry of activity on capital cases.
ย
First, on Wednesday the Court granted cert in Hill v. Crosby (05-8794), in which it will consider whether a death-row inmate’s challenge to Florida’s planned method of executing him can proceed under federal civil rights laws, or whether it belongs in a habeas proceeding. The two questions presented are: (1) Whether a complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 by a death-sentenced state prisoner, who seeks to stay his execution in order to pursue a challenge to the chemicals utilized for carrying out the execution, is properly recharacterized as a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254? (2) Whether, under this Court’s decision in [Nelson v. Alabama (2004)], a challenge to a particular protocol the State plans to use during the execution process constitutes a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983? Given the briefing schedule set by the Court, the case likely will be argued this term.
ย
Next, late last night the Court vacated, by a 6-3 vote, a Seventh Circuit order to stay the execution of another death-row inmate in Donahue v. Bieghler (05A684). Bieghler, a drug dealer convicted in Indiana of killing the informant he thought put him out of business and the informant’s pregnant girlfriend, also challenged his planned method of execution. The Seventh Circuit entered its stay order late last night, and the Court’s ruling came down after midnight, allowing the execution to proceed. Justices Stevens, Ginsburg and Breyer dissented.
ย
Apparently, the difference between Bieghler and Hill was that Bieghler’s case was a direct challenge to the constitutionality of lethal injection (which has survived many reviews), while Hill’s concerns the procedures governing how inmates can challenge methods of executions. If so, Hill may help resolve a procedural question, but it likely will not alter Hill’s slim chance of overturning his death sentence on the merits.
ย
That’s all for week one of the recess. Thanks for reading!
ย
Ken & Kim
ย
From the Appellate Practice Group at Wiggin and Dana. For more information, contact Kim Rinehart, Ken Heath, Aaron Bayer, or Jeff Babbin at 203-498-4400
