The Supreme Court agreed to clar­i­fy the impact of its 2002 Ring v. Arizona rul­ing that held that jurors, rather than a judge, must be allowed to deter­mine whether a defen­dant is eli­gi­ble for a death sen­tence. The Justices will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was cor­rect when it over­turned Warren Summerlin’s death sen­tence, hold­ing that Ring should apply retroac­tive­ly to inmates who had exhaust­ed their direct appeal. While the Supreme Court’s Ring rul­ing inval­i­dat­ed the death sen­tenc­ing laws of Arizona, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska and Colorado, it did not make clear if its rul­ing should apply retroac­tive­ly to every­one on those states’ death rows. Since the deci­sion, courts have issued dif­fer­ing inter­pre­ta­tions on the retroac­tiv­i­ty ques­tion.
The Supreme Court will also hear the case an Alabama death row inmate who claims that exe­cu­tion by lethal injec­tion would be uncon­sti­tu­tion­al­ly cru­el because of his exist­ing med­ical con­di­tion. (Associated Press, December 1, 2003) In Nelson v. Campbell, the Court will focus on the prop­er pro­ce­dur­al sta­tus of the appeal, rather than on the method of exe­cu­tion. See DPIC’s Ring v. Arizona page. See also, Supreme Court.

Citation Guide