Following a stay last month, SCOTUS grants cert on a method of execution Eighth Amendment case from Missouri

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The US Supreme Court this morning issued <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/043018zor_6kh7.pdf">this order list</a>&nbsp;this morning that includes a trio of grant of certiorari.&nbsp; The only criminal case of the three is <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bucklew-v-precythe/"><em>Bucklew v. Precythe</em></a>.&nbsp; Interestingly, Bucklew only first came to SCOTUS last month when, as noted in <a href="http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2018/03/scotus-by-5-4-vote-stays-missouri-execution.html">this prior post</a>, the Supreme Court Justice split 5-4 when granting&nbsp;Russell Bucklew a stay from his execution in Missouri based in part on his claim that any lethal injection would violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment because he has "blood-filled tumors [growing] in his head, neck, and throat."&nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p>Here is how <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bucklew-v-precythe/">this SCOTUSblog case page</a> describes the issues presented by Bucklew's cert petition:&nbsp;</p> <blockquote><strong><u>Issues</u>:</strong> (1) Whether a court evaluating an as-applied challenge to a state’s method of execution based on an inmate’s rare and severe medical condition should assume that medical personnel are competent to manage his condition and that procedure will go as intended; (2) whether evidence comparing a state’s method of execution with an alternative proposed by an inmate must be offered via a single witness, or whether a court at summary judgment must look to the record as a whole to determine whether a factfinder could conclude that the two methods significantly differ in the risks they pose to the inmate; and (3) whether the Eighth Amendment requires an inmate to prove an adequate alternative method of execution when raising an as-applied challenge to the state’s proposed method of execution based on his rare and severe medical condition.</blockquote> <p>Interestingly, on the order list when granting cert, the Supreme Court asked the parties to brief some additional issues.&nbsp; Here is what the Court said when granting cert:</p> <blockquote> <p>The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. In addition to the questions presented in the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following Question: Whether petitioner met his burden under <em>Glossip v. Gross</em>, 576 U. S. ___ (2015), to prove what procedures would be used to administer his proposed alternative method of execution, the severity and duration of pain likely to be produced, and how they compare to the State's method of execution.</p> </blockquote>This <em>Bucklew</em> case likely will not be argued until October or November 2018, and likely will not produce an opinion from the Court until probably around this time next year. So, stay tuned.</div> Via RSSMix.com Mix ID 8247011 http://www.rssmix.com/