December 21, 2006
Lethal injection mess hits Ohio again
As reported here at ODPI, U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost has followed up his remarkable lethal injection work earlier this month by today granting a stay to Kenneth Biros because of the litigation and questions surrounding questions Ohio's lethal injection protocol. Judge Frost's latest opinion is available at this link. Here is one of many notable passages:
Faced with two different orders by two different panels reaching two different conclusions, this Court is left with the task of determining what the law of this case is. Because neither order provides any reasoning for its outcome, this Court can only conclude that the law of the case is that this Court should evaluate individually and on a case-by-case basis each motion for a preliminary injunction that comes before it. In other words, there is apparently no substantive law of the case as to all intervening plaintiffs here because there is no apparent consistency to the appellate decisions that have arisen from this litigation.
Some recent and related posts:
- The lethal mess in Ohio
- My lethal injection piece on SSRN
- Isn't it finally time for Congress to do something about lethal injection problems?
- Who will demonstrate lethal injection leadership?
- An interesting perspective on the lethal injection mess
December 21, 2006 at 03:45 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lethal injection mess hits Ohio again:
Whatever one thinks about the merits of Judge Frost's opinions in this matter, his complaint about the Sixth Circuit's handling of the various appeals is right on the money. One wonders why, when pressed for time, the appeals court can't issue a summary order like the ones that have confounded Judge Frost, but then issue an opinion explaining that order a few weeks later. That's exactly what the Sixth Circuit recently did in an election case featuring two of the judges on the panel in these cases. (The election case is Morrison v. Colley, No. 06-4216. The panel of Siler, Gilman, and Griffin heard argument on Sept. 20, issued an interim order on Sept. 20, and an explanatory opinion on Oct. 12).
Posted by: LT | Dec 21, 2006 5:24:02 PM
Ohio is a better place than this. Hopefully they can clean up their act.
Posted by: Ohio Rules | Apr 12, 2008 9:35:46 PM