CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.

Alabama's Lethal Injection Survives Another Challenge

J.D. Lloyd - Tuesday, February 21, 2017



Today, the United States Supreme Court denied an Alabama death-row inmate’s request to review the constitutionality of Alabama’s three-drug execution protocol. Tommy Arthur argued that Alabama’s lethal injection cocktail violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment” because the method risks severe and unnecessary pain and suffering. The Court’s refusal to review the protocol almost certainly means that Tommy Arthur, who has been on death row for more than 30 years, will likely be executed soon. It also likely means that defendants who hope to challenge Alabama’s method of execution face a massive uphill battle in future fights.


Since lethal injection became the preferred method of execution in the 1980s, almost all states have used a three-drug cocktail to carry out the execution. The first drug administered would be a large amount of a sedative that’s supposed to knock the inmate unconscious and suppress all sensation. The second drug would be a paralytic, which would stop all muscular-skeletal movements, including the diaphragm. The final drug would cause the heart to stop.


Until recently, the first drug used in the three-drug protocol was either sodium thiopental. The manufacturer discontinued production of that drug, so states turned to pentobarbital. That drug also became unavailable in 2013. The states then turned to midazolam, the drug at the heart of recent Eighth Amendment litigation.


According to experts, midazolam doesn’t have the anesthetic effect of thiopental or pentobarbital. This is important because the second and third drugs administered in the the lethal injection process are extremely painful. Reports describe the pain from these drugs as a searing, burning pain spreading from the injection site throughout the body. Again, they literally stop your breathing and your heart. So, without a strong sedative, an inmate is likely facing an excruciating (and often prolonged) execution.


Executions using midazolam have been awful. Defendants executed with the drug in Oklahoma, Arizona, and Alabama died slowly and, apparently, very painfully when midazolam has been the first drug administered. (Justice Sotomayor’s dissent below details these executions.)


In challenging a method of execution as unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment, a defendant must show a readily available constitutional alternative. Here, Arthur argued that there was a constitutional alternative to lethal injection in Alabama: the firing squad. The lower federal courts rejected this claim because Alabama law doesn’t specifically provide for death-by-firing-squad. Because Arthur couldn’t prove a constitutional alternative, the court wouldn’t review his claim that the cocktail using midazolam was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.


Justice Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent from the the Court’s refusal to consider this case. The dissent pointed out that Alabama recently amended its laws to allow for the execution of a defendant by “any constitutional method of execution.” See 15-18-82.1(c). Justice Sotomayor argued that Arthur met his burden of showing a constitutional alternative, even if that alternative wasn’t on the books in Alabama.


The dissent here was largely a critique on the lethal-injection protocol itself and the Court’s refusal to consider how screwed up our Eighth Amendment jurisprudence has become when a defendant can show that a method of execution causes unnecessary (and unconstitutional) pain and suffering, but can still be executed with that method because a State doesn’t have another method of execution on the books.


Read Sotomayor’s dissent here.



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.



Alabama Death-Row Inmates Ask for SCOTUS Review

J.D. Lloyd - Friday, January 06, 2017

Today, the US Supreme Court is considering three cert petitions involving important questions challenging the Alabama capital sentencing scheme. Two challenges involve the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Hurst v. Florida, which held that any fact necessary to expose a defendant to the death penalty must be found by a jury, not a judge.


Two cert petitions involve Tommy Arthur, a man who’s been on Alabama’s death row for 30 years. One petition is a Hurst-based challenge. In that petition, Arthur (1) makes a general challenge to Alabama’s scheme under Hurst; (2) argues Hurst requires a unanimous jury vote for death (his vote for death was 11-1); and (3) claims Hurst applies retroactively.


Arthur’s second petition raises Eighth Amendment claims against Alabama’s execution protocol.


The Court is also considering a cert petition from Jerry Bohannon. While I do not have a copy of Bohannon’s cert petition, I would imagine he is raising claims similar to those he presented to the Alabama Supreme Court in his case that was decided in September 2016. There, the Court rejected a number of Hurst claims, most notably Bohannon’s challenge that Hurst requires a jury to decide the weight of aggravating factors against mitigating factors.


In Alabama, a judge makes the final sentencing determination and must decide that the aggravating factors of a case outweigh the mitigating factors in order to sentence a defendant to death. Under Alabama law (which is grounded in pre-Aprendi/Ring SCOTUS decisions), the weighing of aggravators versus mitigators is purely a job for the judge, not the jury. A fairly clear and long line of cases has held that the Sixth Amendment does not require a jury to conduct this weighing. Hurst calls this thinking into question.


I’m bearish on either case’s chance. I think Arthur has a better shot on the Eighth Amendment issue than the Sixth Amendment issue, but I don’t think he’d have the votes to do anything. Bohannon’s weighing claim is somewhat blunted by the fact that the jury recommended death by a vote of 11-1, so whatever error he claims might be harmless. Moreover, I don’t believe he raised a claim that Hurst requires juror unanimity, which probably would have helped. The Court should wait on a better vehicle – an override case - to take that issue up.


However, should the Court take up Bohannon’s case on the weighing issue, I think there’s a good chance the Court would rule in Bohannon’s favor and hold that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to determine the weight of aggravators versus mitigators. I think the votes are there. Ginsburg authored Ring, Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent in the denial of cert in Woodward v. AL, a case that challenged override in the pre-Hurst era, Breyer believes the Eighth Amendment requires a jury to find everything (even if he doesn’t like Ring) and joined Sotomayor’s dissent in Woodward, and Kagan, Kennedy, Thomas and Roberts were in the majority in Hurst.


Even if the Court doesn’t take up one of these two cases, I believe the writing is on the wall that the Court will be forced to take a closer look at Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme either this term or next.



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.



Recent Posts


social media court systems, 2016 election, sheffield v state hoover alabama Donald Trump, church robberies john earle redfearn IV v state fourth amendment ex parte briseno birchfield v north dakota Malone v State steve avery boaz alabama ferguson missouri Guy Terrell Junior constitutional violations smith v state executions minor offenses adger alabama attempted murder mobile alabama second amendment theft of property Walker County Alabama drug crimes homicide endangerment of a child jerry bohannon Briarwood Presbyterian Church morris alabama alfonso morris brady v maryland calhoun county alabama hurst v florida concealed carry alabama criminal law roundup blount county alabama scotus south carolina Samuel Alito drug smuggling Woods v State constitutional law, stoves v state OJ Simpson christian guitierez brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix mount olive alabama fraud aiding and abetting beylund v north dakota domestic violence shooting death robberies Thomas Hardiman brian fredick lucas tarrant alabama Ingmire v State eric sterling bernard v north dakota birmingham alabama shooting apprendi v new jersey US Supreme Court Update Neil Gorsuch sarah koenig lauderdale county alabama debit card skimming scams baldwin county alabama animal cruelty decatur alabama criminal justice mountain brook alabama serial sexual assault fraudulent checks trussville alabama morgan county alabama fort payne alabama armed robbery kimberly alabama court of criminal appeals russell calhoun drug seizure pelham alabama mike gilotti rainbow city alabama New York Times burglary limestone county alabama criminal mischief drug busts Glaze v State street racing Benn v State operation bullseye midazolam abuse Justice Sotomayor ake v oklahoma death penalty Jefferson County Alabama lamar county Mike Hubbard death penalty, Hillary Clinton, murder sixth amendment illegal gambling LWOP habeas corpus relief Dylann Roof Lucky D Arcade home repair fraud Wesley Adam Whitworth Pleasant Grove Alabama alabama law enforcement agency hall v florida drug activity asia mcclain nathan woods legende v state cherokee county alabama warrantless blood draws Alonzo Ephraim heritage christian university springville alabama kidnapping levins v state editorial road rage brookside alabama William Pryor Etowah County Alabama, homicide rate underage drinking Alabaster alabama Marengo County Alabama pinson alabama drug trafficking, texas debtor prison state of arizona domestic abuse ring v arizona Adamsville alabama prostitution sting self defense netflix Kay Ivey Gardendale Alabama shoplifting eleventh circuit ruling heflin alabama fairfield alabama, fultondale alabama public assistance fraud stanley brent chapman parole capital offenses shelby county capital punishment mulga alabama Fentanyl keith v state lethal injection aziz sayyed narcotics investigation negligent homicide abduction brendan dassey huntsville alabama department of justice, breaking and entering eugene lee jones v state making a murderer dora alabama SCOTUS, dothan alabama cullman alabama Tommy Arthur hoax destructive devices banville v state sentencing law and policy blog summaries Rule 32 identity theft adnan syed, Stephen Breyer hurst mandamus avondale alabama kenneth eugene billups Easter lethal injection drugs embezzlement christmas shooting alabama supreme court battles v state operation crackdown clarence thomas strickland v washington blountsville alabama 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Eutaw Alabama bomb threat car accident mcwilliams v dunn felony assaults department of justice Kareem Dacar Gaymon terell corey mcmullin mccalla alabama towles v state npr Tracie Todd arson Shonda Walker, § 13A-3-23 montgomery alabama oneonta alabama court of criminal appeal releases economic growth gun control huntsville illegal gun carry baltimore city circuit court utah supreme court abandonment hanceville alabama moore v texas warrior alabama bailey v us OJ Simpson Made in America eighth amendment, alabama utah v strieff florence alabama dekalb county alabama assault peyton pruitt Joshua Reese implied consent judicial override crime of passion capital murder forced isolation campbell v state st clair county alabama state of alabama moving violations Xavier Beasley foley alabama benjamin todd acton § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing madison alabama Sardis Alabama CCA update the mannequin challenge marion county gun rights betton v state anniston alabama, talladega superspeedway tuscaloosa alabama edwards v arizona criminal justice reform, bessemer alabama nicholas hawkins West Alabama maryland court of special appeals fake kidnapping, albertville alabama drug possession, greene county alabama unlawful manufacturing pell city alabama pruitt v state gadsden alabama theft



These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |


As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.