Hill v. McDonough

Last updated
Hill v. McDonough
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 26, 2006
Decided June 12, 2006
Full case nameClarence E. Hill, Petitioner v. James R. McDonough, Interim Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.
Docket no. 05-8794
Citations547 U.S. 573 ( more )
126 S. Ct. 2096; 165 L. Ed. 2d 44; 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4674; 74 U.S.L.W. 4307; 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 242
Case history
PriorPetition dismissed, M.D. Fla., Jan. 21, 2006; affirmed, 437 F.3d 1084 (11th Cir. 2006); cert. granted, 546 U.S. 1158(2006).
Holding
Because a death row prisoner's Eighth Amendment challenge to the method of execution was not a habeas corpus petition, but instead stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983, his claim could not be barred by his previously filed petition for habeas relief. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens  · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy  · David Souter
Clarence Thomas  · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer  · Samuel Alito
Case opinion
MajorityKennedy, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. VIII; U.S. Const. amend. XIV; 28 U.S.C. § 2244; 42 U.S.C.   § 1983

Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573 (2006), was a United States Supreme Court case challenging the use of lethal injection as a form of execution in the state of Florida. The Court ruled unanimously that a challenge to the method of execution as violating the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution properly raised a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides a cause of action for civil rights violations, rather than under the habeas corpus provisions. Accordingly, that the prisoner had previously sought habeas relief could not bar the present challenge.

Contents

Factual background

In 1983, Clarence E. Hill was convicted of the murder of a Pensacola, Florida police officer, and subsequently sentenced to death in 1985, in the Florida Supreme Court case of Hill v. State. [1] At a resentencing hearing in 1986, Hill's death sentence was reinstated, this time being upheld by the Florida Supreme Court. [2] In November 1989, a warrant for Hill's execution was signed by then Governor Robert Martinez, after which Hill sought postconviction relief in both the Florida state courts and the U.S. District Court. In 1992, Hill's relief was granted when it was ruled that the Florida Supreme Court as well as Hill's trial court had not properly reevaluated the aggravating factors warranting a death sentence when one of them was vacated. In Hill v. State, [3] the Florida Supreme Court, having sufficiently reweighed the mitigating factors, resentenced Hill to death. Hill then sought federal habeas corpus relief, which was first denied by the U.S. District Court, then affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. [4]

Lethal injection in Florida

In January 2000, the Florida legislature amended its state statutes changing the prescribed method of execution from electrocution to lethal injection, unless the person sentenced to death affirmatively elects to be executed by electrocution. [5] The precise authority by which lethal injection was to be carried out was left to the Florida Department of Corrections.

The Florida Department of Corrections does not publish its information about lethal injection, and so the only source available describing Florida's use of the lethal injection death penalty comes from Sims v. State, [6] which indicated that the lethal injection death penalty was carried out by first administering sodium thiopental, an anesthetic, then pancuronium bromide, which paralyzes the lungs, and followed lastly by potassium chloride, which inflicts cardiac arrest.

Lower court proceedings

On November 29, 2005, Florida Governor Jeb Bush signed a warrant for Hill's execution, which was to be carried out on January 24, 2006. Upon the signing of his death warrant, Hill requested information from the Department of Corrections regarding the specific methods by which lethal injection were carried out. Sims v. State permitted the Florida Department of Corrections to change its procedures for carrying out the lethal injection death penalty as it saw fit, and Hill sought to find out how those procedures had changed, if at all. The Florida Department of Corrections refused to comply with Hill's request.

Florida state courts

Because the information in Sims v. State seemed to suggest the possibility of causing great bodily harm, Hill filed, on December 15, 2005, a petition for postconviction relief in the state of Florida and requested an evidentiary hearing to investigate whether or not the state's lethal injection death penalty did, in fact, cause bodily harm. The Circuit Court for Escambia County denied Hill's motions for postconviction relief and for an evidentiary hearing. Hill then appealed to the Florida Supreme Court on January 3, 2006. On January 17, 2006, Florida's High Court affirmed. [7]

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida

Three days later, on January 20, Hill filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida under 42 U.S.C. 1983, challenging that Florida's lethal injection death penalty would cause great bodily harm in violation of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Hill requested an injunction barring his execution until his claims could be judged upon as well as a permanent injunction barring the Department of Corrections from utilizing the lethal injection death penalty. Hill did not, however, challenge his death sentence.

The next day, the U.S. District Court denied Hill's petition, contending that standing case law was clear on the matter of jurisdiction. Under Robinson v. Crosby [8] and In re Provenzano, [9] the District Court held that Hill's claim was the same as a petition for habeas corpus, and, as a result, was required to be dismissed because Hill had not filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. 2244(b).

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

With Hill's execution approaching fast, Hill filed an emergency appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which, on the day of Hill's execution, affirmed the U.S. District Court. [10] They agreed with the lower court that Hill's suit was, in fact, a habeas corpus petition, and the District Court was right to dismiss.

Certiorari granted

The same day, Hill petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari and requested a stay of execution. Justice Kennedy granted a temporary stay, which was followed up the next day by a granting of certiorari from the entire Court and a full stay of execution.

Parties and counsel

Petitioner

The petitioner in Hill v. McDonough is Clarence Edward Hill. In the lower courts, Hill is also the plaintiff-appellant.

Respondents

In the lower courts, the respondents in Hill v. McDonough were James V. Crosby, Jr., the Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, and Charlie Crist, the Attorney General of Florida. In the lower courts, both Crosby and Crist were defendants-appellants.

Since the lower court rulings, James V. Crosby, Jr. has been replaced by James R. McDonough, the interim Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections.

Hill has amended his suit to include McDonough and exclude Crosby. Crist remains as a respondent.

Counsel

Hill's counsel of record is D. Todd Doss of Lake City, FL. Assisting him in the appeal are Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Ian Heath Gershengorn, and Eric Berger, all of whom are from Jenner & Block LLP. John Abatecola, a private attorney from Sunrise, FL, is also assisting.

McDonough and Crist's attorney of record is Carolyn M. Snurkowski, the Assistant Deputy Attorney General of Florida. Charlie Crist is also assisting.

Counsel Amicus Curiae

Amicus Curiae for Hill are Human Rights Advocates, Human Rights Watch, and the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights. They are represented by Constance de La Vega, Professor of Law at the University of San Francisco, whose office is at the Frank C. Newman International Human Rights Law Clinic. Assisting is David Weissbrodt, a Regents Professor as well as a Frederickson & Byron Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota.

Amicus Curiae for McDonough and Crist are the Solicitor General’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office, and the Department of Justice. They are represented by Paul D. Clement, the United States Solicitor General. Assisting him are Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher, Deputy Solicitor General Gregory G. Garre, Assistant to the Solicitor General Kannon K. Shanmugam, and Department of Justice Attorney Robert J. Erickson.

Briefs of the petitioner and respondent

In Hill's brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, two questions are presented:

Question One

1. Whether a complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a death-sentenced state prisoner, who seeks to stay his execution in order to pursue a challenge to the chemicals utilized for carrying out the execution, is properly recharacterized as a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Hill's brief

By invoking 42 U.S.C. 1983, Hill argues that the procedures for carrying out lethal injection as prescribed by the Florida Department of Corrections are intended to violate his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. The Eleventh Circuit's dismissal of his petition, Hill argues, fails to adjudicate his Eighth Amendment claim, and, accordingly, requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be reversed.

Government's brief

The government contends that, because the end result of Hill's suit is to challenge a death sentence, the claim must be filed under the 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas statute, under which such challenges are supposed to be filed. Accordingly, the government requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be affirmed.

Hill's rebuttal brief

Hill rebuts the government by saying that habeas claims under 28 U.S.C. 2254 are reserved for challenges for the death penalty as a whole, whereas challenges for the specific method of execution should be controlled by 42 U.S.C. 1983. Accordingly, Hill requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be reversed.

Question Two

2. Whether, under this Court’s decision in Nelson, a challenge to a particular protocol the State plans to use during the execution process constitutes a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Hill's brief

Citing Nelson v. Campbell, [11] Hill argues that, because his petition is only challenging the method by which the state of Florida intends to execute him, and not the death sentence itself, the Court is required to entertain his petition, and, accordingly, requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be reversed.

Government's brief

The government challenges Hill's reading of Nelson, contending that claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983 are only cognizable if a habeas challenge has been entertained. Accordingly, the government requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be affirmed.

Hill's rebuttal brief

Hill rebuts the government by saying that Nelson controls so long as a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983 is specific to the method of the execution and not the sentence itself. Accordingly, Hill requests the Eleventh Circuit's ruling be reversed.

The court's decision

The Supreme Court handed down its decision on June 12, 2006.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in the United States</span> Legal penalty in the United States

In the United States, capital punishment is a legal penalty throughout the country at the federal level, in 27 states, and in American Samoa. It is also a legal penalty for some military offenses. Capital punishment has been abolished in 23 states and in the federal capital, Washington, D.C. It is usually applied for only the most serious crimes, such as aggravated murder. Although it is a legal penalty in 27 states, 20 states have the ability to execute death sentences, with the other seven, as well as the federal government, being subject to different types of moratoriums. The existence of capital punishment in the United States can be traced to early colonial Virginia. Along with Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan, the United States is one of four advanced democracies and the only Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly. It is one of 54 countries worldwide applying it, and was the first to develop lethal injection as a method of execution, which has since been adopted by five other countries. The Philippines has since abolished executions, and Guatemala has done so for civil offenses, leaving the United States as one of four countries to still use this method. It is common practice for the condemned to be administered sedatives prior to execution, regardless of the method used.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Old Sparky</span> Nickname for electric chairs

Old Sparky is the nickname of the electric chairs in Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. Old Smokey was the nickname of the electric chairs used in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. "Old Sparky" is sometimes used to refer to electric chairs in general, and not one of a specific state.

Napoleon Beazley was a convicted murderer executed by lethal injection by the State of Texas for the murder of 63-year-old businessman John Luttig in 1994.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clarence Hill (murderer)</span>

Clarence Edward Hill was an American convicted murderer executed by the state of Florida.

Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198 (2006), is a US Supreme Court case involving the one-year statute of limitations for filing habeas corpus petitions that was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that if the government unintentionally failed to object to the filing of a petition after the AEDPA limitations period has expired, it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to dismiss sua sponte the petition on that basis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Jimmy Ryce</span> American murder case

Samuel James "Jimmy" Ryce was a child who was abducted, raped, and killed by Juan Carlos Chavez in Redland, Florida, United States. On Wednesday, February 12, 2014, Chavez was executed at Florida State Prison in Raiford.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark Dean Schwab</span> American child rapist and murderer (1968–2008)

Mark Dean Schwab was an American murderer and child rapist. He was convicted of the April 18, 1991 rape and murder of 11-year-old Junny Rios-Martinez, Jr. and imprisoned at Raiford Prison in Florida. Schwab was convicted of the crime in 1992 and sentenced to death by lethal injection. In addition, he received two life sentences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ángel Nieves Díaz</span> Puerto Rican convict executed by lethal injection

Ángel Nieves Díaz was a Puerto Rican convict and a suspected serial killer who was executed by lethal injection by Florida. Nieves, who had escaped from a prison in Puerto Rico while serving time for murder, was convicted of shooting and killing the manager of a strip club in Florida in 1979. He maintained his innocence until his death.

Kenneth Biros was an American convicted murderer who was sentenced to death and executed for the aggravated murder, attempted rape, aggravated robbery and felonious sexual penetration of a young woman. Biros was the first condemned person to be executed by lethal injection in the United States with the use of a single drug, setting a Guinness World Record.

Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007), was a case dealing with jury selection in capital cases in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that appeals courts must defer to a trial judge’s decision on whether a potential juror would be able to overcome demur about capital punishment and be open to voting to impose a death sentence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2007 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down six per curiam opinions during its 2007 term, which began October 1, 2007 and concluded September 30, 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Marek (murderer)</span> American murderer (1961–2009)

John Richard Marek was an American death row inmate at Florida State Prison for the rape and murder of a woman in 1983. Marek was executed on August 19, 2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Martin Grossman</span> American murderer (1965–2010)

Martin Edward Grossman was convicted of first degree murder for his part in the December 13, 1984, Florida killing of wildlife officer Peggy Park. He was executed by lethal injection. In the days before his execution, there were a large number of appeals for clemency, ranging from petitions to pleas, as well as a request to halt the execution from Pope Benedict XVI. Grossman, a Jewish American, received strong support from national and international Jewish organizations for his death sentence to be commuted.

The Lethal Injection Secrecy Act is a statute in the US state of Georgia that was signed by the state's governor, Nathan Deal, and went into effect that July. The law makes the identities of people who prescribe drugs used in lethal injections, as well as those of the companies that produce and supply them, state secrets. It also makes the identities of prison staff who carry out executions a state secret. It has been called the strictest law of its kind in the country.

Wilson v. Sellers, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning whether a federal court sitting in a habeas corpus proceeding should "look through" a summary ruling to review the last reasoned decision by a state court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Doyle Hamm</span> American convicted murderer and botched execution survivor

Doyle Lee Hamm was an American death row inmate in Alabama, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1987 murder of Patrick Cunningham, whom he killed while committing a robbery. While on death row, Hamm developed lymphatic cancer, which made it difficult to impossible to achieve the venous access necessary to administer the drugs used in lethal injections. Despite months of warning by Hamm's attorney and human rights observers and a decades' long legal battle, the Alabama Department of Corrections attempted to execute Hamm on February 22, 2018. The unsuccessful execution attempt lasted nearly three hours and drew international attention. In March 2018, Hamm and the state of Alabama reached a confidential settlement, the terms of which precluded a second execution attempt, giving Hamm a de facto sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole, although his sentence was not formally commuted. Hamm remained in prison until his death from cancer-related complications in 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Donovan Parks</span> 1996 murder in Georgia, United States

On March 28, 1996, Donovan Corey Parks, an American corrections officer, was murdered by two gang members in Baldwin County, Georgia. His two killers: Robert Earl Butts Jr. and Marion Wilson Jr. were executed for the crime by the state of Georgia via lethal injection, in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Wilson was the 1,500th person to be executed in the United States since capital punishment was resumed in 1976.

Nance v. Ward, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to death row inmates' as-applied challenges to methods of execution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark Asay</span> Executed American spree killer (1964–2017)

Mark James Asay was an American spree killer who was executed by the state of Florida for the 1987 racially motivated murders of two men in Jacksonville, Florida. He was convicted, sentenced to death, and subsequently executed in 2017 at Florida State Prison by lethal injection. Asay's execution generated attention as it was noted by multiple news agencies that he was the first white person to be executed in Florida for killing a black person. He was also the first person to be executed in the United States using the drug etomidate.

Nelson v. Campbell, 541 U.S. 637 (2004), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court considering whether a prisoner's appeal of proposed execution procedures was equivalent to a habeas corpus petition. The court held unanimously that an appeal of proposed execution procedures is different from a habeas corpus petition because it is not an appeal of a conviction or sentence.

References

  1. 477 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1985)
  2. Hill v. State, 515 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 993(1988).
  3. 643 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1995)
  4. Hill v. Moore, 175 F.3d 915 (11th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1087(2000).
  5. Fla. Stat. § 922.105
  6. 754 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 2000)
  7. Hill v. State, No. SC06-2, __ So. 2d __, 2006 WL 91302 (Fla. Jan. 17, 2006), cert. denied, No. 05-8731, 2006 WL 160276 (Feb. 27, 2006)
  8. Robinson v. Crosby, 358F.3d1281 (11th Cir.2004).
  9. In re Provenzano, 215F.3d1233 (11th Cir.2000).
  10. Hill v. Crosby, 437F.3d1084 (11th Cir.2006).
  11. 541 U.S. 637 (2004)