Capital Case Roundup — Death Penalty Court Decisions the Week of May 112020

NEWS (5/​15/​2020) — Nebraska: The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled in favor of Nebraska media out­lets and the state’s ACLU in a pub­lic records law­suit and direct­ed the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services to release records relat­ed to the state’s lethal-injec­tion drugs. In BH Media Group, Inc. v. Frakes, the court ordered DOCS direc­tor Scott Frakes (pic­tured) to dis­close doc­u­ments detail­ing its efforts to obtain lethal-injec­tion drugs to car­ry out the exe­cu­tions, includ­ing the name of the drug sup­pli­er. The court per­mit­ted the state to redact infor­ma­tion that would iden­ti­fy mem­bers of the execution team.


NEWS (5/​15/​2020) — Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has denied a peti­tion filed by fed­er­al death-row pris­on­ers ask­ing the full court to review a 2 – 1 deci­sion of a cir­cuit pan­el that lift­ed a dis­trict court injunc­tion against fed­er­al exe­cu­tions but failed to reach a con­sen­sus on what the law required.

Judge Tatel, who dis­sent­ed from the pan­el deci­sion, said that he believed that the case was wor­thy of en banc review but the Supreme Court direct­ed this court to pro­ceed with appro­pri­ate dis­patch’” and the circuit’s review should be con­clud­ed with­out delay.” The panel’s April 7 deci­sion remand­ed the case to the fed­er­al dis­trict court to decide a series of addi­tion­al unre­solved issues relat­ing to the legal­i­ty and con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of the fed­er­al execution protocol.


NEWS (5/​14/​2020) — Tennessee: A split pan­el of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has grant­ed a new tri­al to Tennessee death-row pris­on­er Anthony Hines, revers­ing his 1986 con­vic­tion and his 1989 death sen­tence. In Hines v. Mays, the court held that Hines’ coun­sel pro­vid­ed inef­fec­tive rep­re­sen­ta­tion at tri­al when, in a case involv­ing a mur­der at a motel, they failed to inter­view and effec­tive­ly cross-exam­ine a wit­ness who was present at the motel at the time of the mur­der and had an appar­ent motive to commit it.

The court fur­ther deter­mined that Hines’ coun­sel in his 1989 penal­ty tri­al fol­low­ing the rever­sal of his first death sen­tence had been inef­fec­tive for fail­ing to inves­ti­gate and present evi­dence relat­ing to this wit­ness to estab­lish the mit­i­gat­ing fac­tor of resid­ual doubt.” The court acknowl­edged the Eighth Amendment does not require that a defen­dant be per­mit­ted to present evi­dence of resid­ual doubt as a mit­i­gat­ing cir­cum­stance in a resen­tenc­ing pro­ceed­ing but not­ed that Tennessee per­mit­ted the defense to present evi­dence of resid­ual doubt as a mit­i­gat­ing fac­tor under state law.


NEWS (5/​14/​2020) — Florida: The Florida Supreme Court issued unsigned opin­ions uphold­ing the con­vic­tions and death sen­tences of two death-row pris­on­ers on direct appeal.

In Bush v. State, the court denied Sean Bush’s chal­lenge to his con­vic­tion and death sen­tence for the 2011 mur­der of his estranged wife. Bush’s con­vic­tion was based sole­ly on cir­cum­stan­tial evi­dence, and for more than a cen­tu­ry, Florida sub­ject­ed such con­vic­tions to height­ened appel­late review. However, in uphold­ing Bush’s con­vic­tion, the court announced that it was aban­don­ing that long-estab­lished safe­guard. Justice Labarga dis­sent­ed from the majority’s sweep­ing deci­sion to aban­don the height­ened stan­dard of review in all crim­i­nal cas­es that are based sole­ly on cir­cum­stan­tial evi­dence,” say­ing today, this Court elim­i­nates anoth­er rea­son­able safe­guard in our death penal­ty jurispru­dence and in Florida’s crim­i­nal law across the board.”

In Smiley v. State, the court affirmed Benjamin Smiley, Jr.’s con­vic­tion and death sen­tence for an April 2013 mur­der dur­ing the com­mis­sion of a botched home burglary.