|
|
Post by thinkinkmesa on Nov 1, 2007 11:17:52 GMT -5
Lethal Injection
(Email I received today)
Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:45 am (PST)
Today, the Ohio Supreme Court refused to stop a common pleas judge in
Lorain County from hearing evidence and deciding whether lethal
injection, as it is done in Ohio, is unconstitutional. What's
especially unusual in this case is that we're doing this in the context
of the criminal case and before the trial.
--
Jeffrey M. Gamso
Legal Director
ACLU of Ohio
4506 Chester Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44103
e-mail: jmgamso@buckeye- express.com
|
|
|
|
Post by pebbles on Nov 2, 2007 19:57:45 GMT -5
Court allows injection case to go ahead
Lorain judge has authority to consider constitutionality of state's execution method
By Andrew Welsh-Huggins Associated Press
Published on Thursday, Nov 01, 2007
COLUMBUS: A judge can hold hearings on whether Ohio's lethal injection procedures are constitutional, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a case that could determine the fate of the state's process for executing inmates.
The court ruled 5-2 that Judge James Burge of Lorain County Common Pleas Court has the authority to hold the hearings and to order the state to turn over documents related to the execution process.
The court rejected the state's argument that Burge, as the presiding judge of a criminal trial, does not have the authority to decide the constitutionality of death penalty law.
Depending on how the hearings proceed, Wednesday's decision could provide the most complete look to date at how Ohio puts inmates to death.
Burge has ordered the state to produce detailed explanations of the equipment and procedures, including an ''exhaustive and detailed'' list of the qualifications and training of the execu
tion team.
Burge has ordered the hearings in the case of Ruben Rivera, who is charged in the 2004 shooting death of Manuel Garcia. Rivera asked Burge to drop the death penalty aspects of his case on the grounds that the state's lethal injection process amounts to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.
Since then, two other Lorain County defendants facing death penalty charges have made similar requests of other judges.
Wednesday's decision clears the way for Burge to consider Rivera's request. More significantly, it means the broader issue of the constitutionality of injection could end up before the state Supreme Court, since Burge's conclusion will probably be appealed regardless of how he rules.
''Once my decision gets back up through there, then we'll have an answer on whether lethal injection is going to be a method of execution in Ohio,'' said Burge, who called the court's ruling gratifying.
Burge, 60, a Democrat elected last year, declined to give his position on the death penalty.
Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann is disappointed with the decision, said spokesman Ted Hart, who declined further comment.
The decision means the state can no longer hide the process it uses for putting inmates to death, said Jeffrey Gamso, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer representing Rivera.
''The Ohio Supreme Court says you can't keep it a secret anymore,'' Gamso said. ''If you're going to kill people in this state, you're going to be open about how you do it, and transparent.''
The development comes in the midst of a de facto moratorium on executions nationally after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month to consider the constitutionality of Kentucky's injection procedures.
On Tuesday, the high court halted an execution in Mississippi, the third reprieve granted since the court agreed to hear the Kentucky case.
In Ohio, 20 condemned inmates have joined a federal lawsuit similar to the Kentucky case challenging the state's injection procedure.
Before that case proceeds, the U.S. Supreme Court must decide a technical issue regarding whether some of the Ohio inmates joined the lawsuit before a legal deadline passed.
COLUMBUS: A judge can hold hearings on whether Ohio's lethal injection procedures are constitutional, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a case that could determine the fate of the state's process for executing inmates.
The court ruled 5-2 that Judge James Burge of Lorain County Common Pleas Court has the authority to hold the hearings and to order the state to turn over documents related to the execution process.
The court rejected the state's argument that Burge, as the presiding judge of a criminal trial, does not have the authority to decide the constitutionality of death penalty law.
Depending on how the hearings proceed, Wednesday's decision could provide the most complete look to date at how Ohio puts inmates to death.
Burge has ordered the state to produce detailed explanations of the equipment and procedures, including an ''exhaustive and detailed'' list of the qualifications and training of the execu
tion team.
Burge has ordered the hearings in the case of Ruben Rivera, who is charged in the 2004 shooting death of Manuel Garcia. Rivera asked Burge to drop the death penalty aspects of his case on the grounds that the state's lethal injection process amounts to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.
Since then, two other Lorain County defendants facing death penalty charges have made similar requests of other judges.
Wednesday's decision clears the way for Burge to consider Rivera's request. More significantly, it means the broader issue of the constitutionality of injection could end up before the state Supreme Court, since Burge's conclusion will probably be appealed regardless of how he rules.
''Once my decision gets back up through there, then we'll have an answer on whether lethal injection is going to be a method of execution in Ohio,'' said Burge, who called the court's ruling gratifying.
Burge, 60, a Democrat elected last year, declined to give his position on the death penalty.
Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann is disappointed with the decision, said spokesman Ted Hart, who declined further comment.
The decision means the state can no longer hide the process it uses for putting inmates to death, said Jeffrey Gamso, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer representing Rivera.
''The Ohio Supreme Court says you can't keep it a secret anymore,'' Gamso said. ''If you're going to kill people in this state, you're going to be open about how you do it, and transparent.''
The development comes in the midst of a de facto moratorium on executions nationally after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month to consider the constitutionality of Kentucky's injection procedures.
On Tuesday, the high court halted an execution in Mississippi, the third reprieve granted since the court agreed to hear the Kentucky case.
In Ohio, 20 condemned inmates have joined a federal lawsuit similar to the Kentucky case challenging the state's injection procedure.
Before that case proceeds, the U.S. Supreme Court must decide a technical issue regarding whether some of the Ohio inmates joined the lawsuit before a legal deadline passed.
|
|
