California's lethal injection system is 'broken,' San Jose judge rules

Legal experts consider the California case crucial because of the exhaustive amount of evidence presented, raising the possibility Morales' challenge could ultimately force the U.S. Supreme Court to settle whether lethal injection passes constitutional muster. The Supreme Court has never outlawed a method of execution.

Since last spring, Fogel has accumulated a wealth of evidence from both sides, holding an unprecedented weeklong hearing in September to hear hours of testimony on the pros and cons of California's system of executing inmates.

Morales' lawyers have argued that California's lethal injection procedure has few safeguards to ensure an inmate is put to death humanely, offering testimony from former San Quentin execution team members who admitted they were never trained to carry out the grim task.

The central argument against the state's procedure is that the combination of three drugs masks the potential for the inmate to experience excrutiating pain during an execution.

Among other things, Morales presented evidence suggesting there were problems in a number of past California executions, notably last year's execution of former Crips co-founder Stanley ``Tookie'' Williams.

But state officials have maintained that Morales has presented no concrete evidence that inmates suffer during an execution, and that the state's method is the most humane way of putting a condemned murderer to death. State experts testified that the three-drug cocktail used in executions is more than enough to render an inmate unconscious and unable to experience pain.

Contact Howard Mintz at hmintz@mercurynews.com or (408) 286-0236.