Florida Delays Execution After SCOTUS Strikes Down Death Penalty System

FILE - This Monday, June 30, 2014, file photo shows the Supreme Court building in Washington. No one on the Supreme Court objected publicly when the justices voted to let Arizona proceed with the execution of Joseph ... FILE - This Monday, June 30, 2014, file photo shows the Supreme Court building in Washington. No one on the Supreme Court objected publicly when the justices voted to let Arizona proceed with the execution of Joseph Wood, who unsuccessfully sought information about the drugs that would be used to kill him. Nor did any of the justices try to stop the deaths of inmates in Florida and Missouri by lethal injection. Even as the number of executions annually has dropped by more than half over the past 15 years and the court has barred states from killing juveniles and the mentally disabled, no justice has emerged as a principled opponent of the death penalty. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File) MORE LESS

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — The Florida Supreme Court has delayed the execution of a death row inmate after his attorneys argued that the state should first determine how to apply a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the state’s death penalty system is unconstitutional.

Michael Lambrix was scheduled to die by lethal injection on Feb. 11. The court on Tuesday said that it would be delayed until it issued another order. The court did not provide further details.

The U.S. Supreme Court last month found Florida’s death penalty system flawed because it allows judges, not juries, to decide death sentences.

Scott Browne of the Florida Attorney General’s office said the ruling should not apply to already-decided cases, and wanted the state to execute Lambrix as scheduled.

Lambrix was sentenced for the 1983 slayings of two people he met at a bar. Prosecutors said he killed them after inviting them home for dinner.

11
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for paulw paulw says:

    I know that it’s common for changes in legal standards not to be retroactive, but really, arguing that you should get to kill someone with a system that’s been ruled unconstitutional just because his lawyer didn’t get to the supreme court first?

  2. Avatar for jc jc says:

    Well then, strike down the system in Alabama too. I personally know a judge who did just that – overruled the jury’s recommendation of a life sentence in favor of a death sentence. Why do they do this? To avoid being seen as “soft on crime” – the only way they can get themselves reelected. I see this guy in church, heading up to communion. It sickens me.

  3. Avatar for gr gr says:

    Alas, there is plenty of anecdotal and historical evidence that people will adopt any kind of position, no matter how repugnant, to – in psychobabble terminology – “maintain a role” – that is, keep a job They will support torture, genocide, friggin’ cannibalism if that’s what it takes to keep that damned job.

  4. Yup, see the Stanford prison experiment.

  5. Avatar for gr gr says:

    Yep, that and Millgram.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

5 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for jc Avatar for commiedearest Avatar for kikincali Avatar for gr Avatar for ottnott Avatar for frankrizzo Avatar for eatbees Avatar for frozenstarfire

Continue Discussion