Thursday, October 19, 2006

Justice Anstead, Florida Supreme Court dissent - Arthur Rutherford

ANSTEAD, J., concurring specially.

I concur in the majority's denial of relief because I, too, am bound by the rulings of this Court rejecting similar challenges to the State's procedures for execution by lethal injection in Hill and Rutherford as cited by the majority.

I am troubled, however, by the fact that the State has not at all times made its execution procedures and protocols a matter of public record, and by the fact that since our initial decision in Sims approving the use of lethal injection based substantially on theory, there has been no public evidentiary hearing focused on the purpose and effectiveness of the State's procedures, and on what actually takes place during the course of an execution by lethal injection.

Now that this method of execution has been in place for a number of years we would all benefit by such a hearing.

No comments: