Kenneth Biros stay of execution

From Ohio Death Penalty Information :

December 22, 2006

Kenneth Biros stay of execution: Christopher Bobby has this coverage in the Warren Tribune-Chronicle of yesterday's ruling in US District Court granting a stay of execution to Ohio death row inmate Kenneth Biros, and plans by the Ohio attorney general to appeal the ruling. (Earlier coverage here.)

December 21, 2006

Kenneth Biros stay of execution granted by US District Ct Judge Gregory Frost

US District Court Judge Gregory Frost today granted Ohio death row inmate Kenneth Biros' request for a stay of his January 23 execution date.

How does this comport with the US 6th Circuit Ct of Appeals lifting of a stay of execution for Jeffrey Lundgren, the 6th's upholding of a stay of execution for Jerome Henderson - and the district court's subsequent denial of a stay for John Spirko despite the discrepency? Judge Frost's latest attempt to decipher the actions of the US 6th Circuit Ct of Appeals in litigation surrounding questions over Ohio's lethal injection protocol, in order to issue a coherent ruling in an emergency situation, is in today's ruling here (11-page pdf).

Excerpt from today's ruling:

...Faced with two different orders by two different panels reaching two different conclusions, this Court is left with the task of determining what the law of this case is. Because neither order provides any reasoning for its outcome, this Court can only conclude that the law of the case is that this Court should evaluate individually and on a case-by-case basis each motion for a preliminary injunction that comes before it. In other words, there is apparently no substantive law of the case as to all intervening plaintiffs here because there is no apparent consistency to the appellate decisions that have arisen from this litigation.

...given the evidence that Jeffrey Hil first produced and that is now part of the record, as well as additional, more recent anecdotal evidence that Biros has produced regarding the suspension of executions in Florida and a finding by the Northern District of California that California's three-drug protocol violates the Eighth Amendment, the Court concludes that Biros at the very least has demonstrated a stronger liklihood of success on the merits than some of the plaintiffs who preceded him. This supports an injunction.

The limited record before this Court now includes a growing body of evidence calling Ohio's lethal injection protocol increasingly into question. ...

More information on Kenneth Biros - whose January 23 execution date should still be considered serious despite today's ruling - is here.

Earlier post on Judge Frost's Dec. 6 denial of a stay of execution for John Spirko (scheduled for April 17) is here.

Earlier post on the Jerome Henderson stay of execution upheld w/o explanation by the US 6th Circuit Ct on Dec. 4 is here.

Earlier posts on stay of execution lifted w/o explanation by the US 6th Circuit on the eve of the Oct. 24 Jeffrey Lundgren execution here, here, and here.

December 13, 2006

Clemency hearing dates set for Kenneth Biros, James Filiaggi

The Ohio Parole Board has scheduled clemency hearings for Kenneth Biros and James Filiaggi:

• The clemency hearing for Kenneth Biros is scheduled for Thursday, January 4.

More information on Kenneth Biros, who has a serious execution date set for January 23 (despite being granted inclusion in the Ohio lethal-injection challenge case), is here and here; some other related earlier posts here. ODRC media release on Biros clemency hearing is here.

• The clemency hearing for James Filiaggi is scheduled for Thursday, January 25.

More information on James Filiaggi, who has a serious execution date set for February 13 (because he may not be pursuing further appeals available to him), is here. ODRC media release on Filiaggi clemency hearing is here.

December 8, 2006


US 6th Circuit arguments heard in Cooey v. Taft: Eric Hornbeck has this coverage of yesterday's oral arguments in the US 6th Circuit Ct of Appeals in the Ohio lethal-injection challenge case, Cooey v. Taft. The outcome of the 6th Circuit Ct appeal will determine whether or not an evidentiary hearing examining the Ohio lethal-injection protocol can take place in US District Ct. Terry Kinney has this AP report.


December 7, 2006


Misleading media reports on oral arguments being heard today in the Ohio lethal-injection challenge case:

Terry Kinney has this misleading AP report on oral arguments being heard today by a 3-judge panel (Suhrheinrich, Gilman, Siler) of the US 6th Circuit Ct of Appeals in the Cooey v. Taft case challenging Ohio's lethal-injection protocol.

Excerpt:
Several opponents of Ohio's lethal injection method of execution contend that the chemicals used in the three-step process inflict such severe pain that death results, in effect, from torture.

They want the procedure declared unconstitutional. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to hear their arguments on Thursday, less than a week after the court blocked the scheduled Ohio execution of a convicted murderer.

The challenge was filed in December 2004 on behalf of Richard Cooey, 39, who had been sentenced to die for raping and killing two university students in 1986.

Eight Ohio death row inmates have joined Cooey's lawsuit since then, although two have been executed after failing to obtain stays of execution.

Important Note: Today's oral arguments in the 6th Circuit are pursuant to an interlocutory appeal by the Ohio AG challenging the ongoing proceedings in US District Ct. Today's arguments will not be addressing the constitutionality of Ohio's lethal-injection protocol, but rather whether such an examination can go forward in the district court. The district court proceedings (specifically, a hoped-for evidentiary hearing to actually examine the Ohio protocol for the first time) have been on hold pending the outcome of the appeal being argued today, which involves a statue of limitations question, a res judicata issue, and some other matters. Depending on the outcome of this 6th Circuit appeal, the evidentiary hearing in US district court will either go forward or be barred. The AP article above and other media reports are innacurate in that they suggest that today's proceedings are addressing the consitutionality of the Ohio lethal-injection protocol. Instead, they should accurately report that today's (very important) hearings will determine whether that examination can take place.

Update: Marginally revised AP report is here.