Publications & Testimony

On September 23, 2025, North Carolina law­mak­ers approved and for­ward­ed to Governor Josh Stein for sig­na­ture House Bill 307 — also known as​“Iryna’s Law” — which pro­pos­es sweep­ing changes to the state’s crim­i­nal laws. HB 307 impos­es stricter pre­tri­al release con­di­tions, requires invol­un­tary men­tal health eval­u­a­tions for defen­dants under cer­tain cir­cum­stances, short­ens the time­line for cap­i­tal case appeals, and pro­vides an alter­na­tive to the cur­rent method of…

With just weeks remain­ing before his sched­uled exe­cu­tion, attor­neys for 72-year-old Samuel Lee Smithers are appeal­ing the dis­missal of their motion filed September 19, 2025, argu­ing that exe­cut­ing an elder­ly per­son vio­lates both Florida and the U.S. Constitutions’ pro­hi­bi­tion against cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment and fails to meet any valid peno­log­i­cal jus­ti­fi­ca­tion. On September 22, 2025, the Hillsborough County Circuit Court denied Mr. Smithers’ request for an…

Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) has report­ed that at least 1000 peo­ple have been exe­cut­ed in Iran between January 1 and September 23, 2025 — a thir­ty year high. This is the fifth con­sec­u­tive year that Iran has expe­ri­enced an increase in exe­cu­tions, with the biggest year-over-year increase (43%) occur­ring in 2023, in the after­math of the​“Women, Life, Freedom” nation­wide protests. Most exe­cu­tions con­tin­ue to be car­ried out for offens­es that do not meet the…

In a motion filed September 20, 2025, attor­neys for Luigi Mangione, indict­ed in the 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, have filed a broad chal­lenge to the con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of the fed­er­al death penal­ty, argu­ing that it is applied arbi­trar­i­ly, in vio­la­tion of Fifth Amendment’s due process pro­tec­tions and the Eighth Amendment’s pro­hi­bi­tion on cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ments. They are ask­ing the United States District Court in the Southern District…

Acclaimed nov­el­ist and for­mer crim­i­nal defense lawyer John Grisham is set to release a new book titled SHAKEN: The Rush to Execute an Innocent Man on June 9^th, 2026. The book is a non-fic­­tion account of the con­tentious case of Robert Roberson, the Texas man who has been on death row for over twen­ty years and is now fac­ing exe­cu­tion in Texas in October 2025, despite strong evi­dence of his inno­cence. > ​“Robert Roberson is inno­cent because the evi­dence devel­oped in recent…

Murder vic­tims’ fam­i­ly mem­bers hold a wide range of views about what jus­tice means. For some, the death penal­ty holds the promise of clo­sure, while for oth­ers, it is a source of con­tin­ued trau­ma and uncer­tain­ty. In two recent cas­es, vic­tims’ fam­i­ly mem­bers have pub­licly expressed their oppo­si­tion to the death penal­ty, cit­ing their reli­gious views and need to for­give. Will Berry was just 11 years old when Geoffrey West shot and killed his moth­er, Margaret Parrish…

The cap­i­tal charges filed against Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing con­ser­v­a­tive polit­i­cal activist Charlie Kirk on September 10^th, have drawn new atten­tion to Utah’s death penal­ty. Although Utah was among the first states to rein­state the death penal­ty after it was inval­i­dat­ed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972, and the first to per­form an exe­cu­tion in the mod­ern era, exe­cu­tions have been rare over the last 50 years. Just eight peo­ple have been executed in…

Byron Black was exe­cut­ed in Tennessee by lethal injec­tion on August 5, 2025. During his exe­cu­tion, Mr. Black unex­pect­ed­ly and repeat­ed­ly groaned over the course of sev­er­al min­utes and audi­bly told his spir­i­tu­al advi­sor that he was in pain. An autop­sy released September 10, 2025, pro­vides some expla­na­tion. It found evi­dence of​“pul­monary con­ges­tion and ede­ma”– defined as an abnor­mal buildup of flu­id in the lungs which can pro­duce sen­sa­tions of​“doom,…

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 deci­sion in Atkins v. Virginia estab­lished that the Eighth Amendment pro­hibits exe­cut­ing peo­ple with intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty. The Court lat­er clar­i­fied that rigid IQ cut­offs were not per­mis­si­ble and also required states to con­sid­er mean­ing­ful evi­dence of intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty, includ­ing sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly valid expert tes­ti­mo­ny and adap­tive func­tion­ing deficits. Despite this unequiv­o­cal constitutional protection,…