The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has upheld the constitutionality of Ohio’s lethal injection protocol. In a unanimous ruling, a three judge panel upheld the district court’s previous decision denying death-row inmates Raymond Tibbetts and Alva Campbell their request to enjoin their pending executions. It’s the latest case in a string of stories concerning the state’s method of execution.
Ohio’s Death Penalty Drama
The Buckeye State’s execution protocol has been a recurring news item. In November 2017, the state’s attempted execution of Alva Campbell (one of the plaintiffs here) was cancelled when prison officials couldn’t find a vein to inject the lethal mixture of drugs. Campbell was sentenced to death in 1998 after killing 18-year-old Charles Dials during a jail break attempt.
Campbell’s legal team has also requested execution by firing squad on numerous occasions, a request that state officials are (extremely) unlikely to grant.
According to the state’s current execution schedule, Raymond Tibbets’s execution will occur next week, on February 13th, 2018. That’s a date subject to change, however, as eleventh hour postponements are common. Tibbetts was sentenced to death for the brutal murder of his wife and landlord in 1997.
Death Penalty and the Law
State death penalty cases are among the most heavily-litigated cases. Trials commonly take years, appeals generally go through state and federal courts for decades, and last minute stay requests or clemency petitions are common. Challenges to the method of execution as violating the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause have been common in recent years.
An approaching execution is a common time for reigniting America’s long-running debate over the wisdom — and constitutionality — of capital punishment.