_ ~~ E~i.-.: F t r _3

Similar documents
OCTOBER TERM 2016 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CASE NO.

***THIS IS A CAPITAL CASE*** ***EXECUTIONS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 20, 24, and 27, 2017*** No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

CAPITAL CASE EXECUTION SCHEDULED NOVEMBER 9, 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS. WENDY KELLEY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

No. Related Case Nos & CAPITAL CASE EXECUTION SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 27, 2017

OCTOBER TERM No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. STATE OF ARKANSAS, Petitioner, DON WILLIAM DAVIS,

**EXECUTIONS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 20, 24, and 27, 2017** IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. Nos.

Case 4:18-cv JM Document 11 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 14A796 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT MARK MARTIN, SECRETARY OF STATE INTERVENORS FIRST AMENDED CROSS-CLAIM

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 3:16-cv JO Document 9 Filed 02/24/17 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CASE NO. 12- CAPITAL CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JOHN FERGUSON. Petitioner,

1900 M Street, NW, Ste. 250, Washington, D.C

In the Supreme Court of the United States

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.SC PALM BEACH COUNTY CANVASSING BOARD, Petitioner,

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION

In the United States Court of Appeals

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT NO

Case 4:13-cv JMM Document 4 Filed 07/16/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 4:17-cv KGB Document 53 Filed 04/15/17 Page 1 of 59 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 08/28/2018 Page 1 of 15 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SCOTUS Death Penalty Review. Lisa Soronen State and Local Legal Center

Supreme Court of the United States

Cite as 2018 Ark. 313 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC DENNIS SOCHOR, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Case 1:14-cv GJQ Doc #34 Filed 04/16/15 Page 1 of 10 Page ID#352 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC CLEMENTE JAVIER AGUIRRE-JARQUIN., Petitioner, v.

NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. SAMUEL DAVID CROWE, Petitioner, -v.-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No.2013 CT SCT 2013-CT SCT. MILTON TROTTER, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee

DOCKET UM 1182: In the Matter of an Investigation Regarding Competitive Bidding

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. BRENT RAY BREWER, Petitioner,

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Case No. SC12-216

Case Doc 7 Filed 09/03/15 Entered 09/03/15 16:39:40 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 2

v. No. 5:01-cv-377-DPM

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANNOUNCEMENTS COLORADO SUPREME COURT MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2003

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Case 5:10-cv JLH Document 12 Filed 03/11/2010 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

In the Supreme Court of the United States

MOTION FOR REHEARING AND/OR CLARIFICATION. Defendant, IAN DECO LIGHTBOURNE, by and through undersigned counsel,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No.: SC RESPONSE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

CABLE HUSTON. July 20, 2012 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING & FIRST CLASS MAIL

In the Supreme Court of the United States

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI $104, U.S. CURRENCY ET AL APPELLEE PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

In the Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING. The undersigned hereby certifies that she is a member of the Bar of the

MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER BARRING DEFENDANTS FROM SCHEDULING PLAINTIFFS EXECUTION DURING THE PENDENCY OF THIS LITIGATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. September Term, Petition Docket No MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE, vs.

Case 1:12-cv GBL-JFA Document 17 Filed 09/10/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 185

In the Supreme Court of the United States

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Case 3:12-cv Document 99 Filed in TXSD on 04/07/14 Page 1 of 9

P R Case No.,

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NEWTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS CIVIL DIVISION THE ARKANSAS POLLUTION CONTROL AND ECOLOGY COMMISSION'S RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF APPEAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS. Arkansas Supreme Court Upholds State s Death Penalty Three-Drug Protocol. Kelley v. Johnson, 2016 Ark. 268, 496 S.W.3d 346.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No DR SCT EN BANC ORDER. This matter comes before the En Banc Court on Richard Gerald Jordan's Successive

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES FOR REHEARING AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC PALM BEACH COUNTY CANVASSING BOARD, Petitioner, vs.

In the Supreme Court of the United States. District of Columbia and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, Petitioners, Dick Heller, et al.

Rule Change #1998(14)

Affirmation of Howard Cotton Exhibit 1

Florida Department of Environmental Protection Northwest District 160 Governmental Center Pensacola, Florida

Case 2:11-cv JTM-JCW Document 359 Filed 09/26/12 Page 1 of 4 IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

[ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 15, 2010] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

SIGNED AND ENTERED this 30th day of June, 2011.

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Case No. SC

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

TEL (503) FAX (503) Suite S.W. Taylor Portland, OR November 8, 2007

1900 M Street, NW, Ste. 250, Washington, D.C

In the Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States

PROCEDURE FOR VACATING. A STREET, ALLEY, or ROW

- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,_. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Transcription:

~ ~~ E~i.-.: F t r _3

***THIS IS A CAPITAL CASE*** ***EXECUTIONS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 20, 24, AND 27, 2017 *** No. 16-6496 ~r~ t~je ~u~ren~e Court of t~je ~r~iteb ~t~.te~ STACEY JOHNSON, JASON McGEHEE, BRUCE WARD, TERRICK NOONER, JACK JONES, MARCEL WILLIAMS, KENNETH WILLIAMS, DON DAVIS, and LEDELL LEE Petitioners WENDY KELLEY, in her official capacity as Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, and ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION Respondents On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas PETITION FOR REHEARING MEREDITH L. BOYLAN Counsel ofrecord GEORGE KOSTOLAMPROS VENABLE LLP 600 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC, 20001 (202) 344-4000 MLBoylan@Venable. com GKostolampros@Venable. com Counsel for Petitioners (Additional counsel follows)

~TENNIFFER HORAN Federal Public Defender Eastern District of Arkansas rtohn C. WILLIAMS Asst Federal Public Defender 1401 W. Capitol, Ste. 490 Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-6114 john_c Williams@fd.org JEFF ROSENZWEIG 300 Spring Street, Ste. 310 Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 372-5247 jrosenzweig@att.net Counsel for Petitioners ~Tohnson, hones, Lee, and Kenneth Williams Counsel fog Petitioners McGehee, Nooner, Ward, and Marcel Williams JENNIFER MERRIGAN ~TOSEPH PERKOVICH PHILLIPS BLACK P.O. Box 2171 New York, NY 10008 (212) 400-1660 j.merrigan@phillipsblack.org j. p erkovich@p hillip sb lack. or g DEBORAH R. SALLINGS 35715 Sample Road Roland, AR 72135 deborahsallings@gmail. com Counsel for Petitioner Da vls Counsel for Petitioner Ward

TABLE OF CONTENTS Grounds for Rehearing... l Conclusion...3 Certificate of Counsel

PETITION FOR REHEARING Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 44.2, Petitioners respectfully petition for rehearing of the Court's order denying certiorari in this case. GROUNDS FOR REHEARING As required by Rule 44.2, there are "intervening circumstances of a substantial or controlling effect" to support rehearing in this case. Specifically, on February 27, 2017, the Governor of Arkansas set execution dates for eight of the nine Petitioners (Nooner being the exception). That fact in itself might not be remarkable, but the details are the executions are scheduled to occur over aten-day period from April 17, 2017, to April 27, 2017, with two executions per night on four separate nights. In the post-greggera, no state has executed so many men in so short a time frame. This unprecedented execution schedule is not merely a substantial new development it is truly extraordinary. As such, it recommends the Court's rehearing of its order denying certiorari in this case. Most fundamentally, the Arkansas schedule is an affront to Petitioners' basic human dignity. "Evolving standards of decency must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person, and the punishment of criminals must conform to that rule." Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407, 420 (2008). Executing eight men in ten days is far outside the bounds of what contemporary society finds acceptable. Every other State to conduct executions spaces them at a reasonable interval no state has performed eight executions in even a month since Texas in 1997. And Arkansas has no legitimate penological reason for scheduling executions in this way. Its reversion ~J

to an antiquated practice one that refutes these condemned men's individuality even in death is simply one last affront to the humanity of men the State has maintained in solitary confinement for decades. The need for rehearing is only increased by the State's use of midazolam as the first drug in the execution protocol. As the dissenting Justices wrote in Az~thur v. Dunn, No. 16-602, slip op. at 16 (Sotomayor, J., dissenting), "we should not blind ourselves to the mounting firsthand evidence that midazolam is simply unable to render prisoners insensate to the pain of execution." As explained in the Petition, Petitioners have already contributed to that evidence in the trial court a contribution the Arkansas Supreme Court ignored by applying an illogical interpretation of Glossrp's requirement to plead an alternative execution method. The Court should grant rehearing so the Petitioners' next contribution does not come in the form of eight botched executions. Even with an ideal execution drug, Arkansas's scheduling choices would warrant another look by the Court. No state has carried out a double execution since 2000. The last time such a thing was attempted, in 2014, Oklahoma mangled the execution of Clayton Lockett. Arkansas's wish to hold four double executions flies in the face of established practice and heightens the risk of suffering to Petitioners. In short, Arkansas's intention to wring eight midazolam executions into a tenday period significantly elevates the urgency and the importance of the Questions Presented in the Petition. Petitioners respectfully request that the Court grant 2

rehearing to consider the propriety of Arkansas's execution method and the Arkansas Supreme Court's interpretation of Baze and Glossip. CONCLUSION The Court should grant the petition for rehearing. MARCH 20, 2017 Respectfully submitted, t~~~ d F W MEREDITH L. BOYI.AN GEORGE KOSTOLAMPROS VENABLE LLP 600 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC, 20001 (202) 344-4000 MLBoylan@Venable.com GKostolampros@Venable.com Counsel for Petitioners 3

CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL I hereby certify that this petition for rehearing is presented in good faith and not for delay, and that it is restricted to the grounds specified in Supreme Court Rule 44.2 L 1~~~ ~ ~ MEREDITH L. BOYLAN

***THIS IS A CAPITAL CASE*** No. 16-6496 err t~je ~u~ren~e court o~ t~je ~i~ited~ ~t~cte~ STACEY JOHNSON, JASON McGEHEE, BRUCE WARD, TERRICK NOONER, JACK JONES, MARCEL WILLIAMS, KENNETH WILLIAMS, DON DAVIS, and LEDELL LEE Petitioners WENDY KELLEY, in her official capacity as Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, and ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION Respondents CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served all parties required to be served with the Petitioners' Petition for Rehearing. Specifically, in compliance with S. Ct. R. 29.3, I emailed and hand delivered a copy of these documents to below listed counsel on March 20, 2017 Lee Rudofsky, Solicitor General Nicholas Bronni, Assistant Solicitor General Jennifer Merritt, Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201 501.682.1319 Counsel for Respondents 1 1~.~.-.-".- ~v~ ~ MEREDITH L. BOYLAN

VENABLE LLP 600 MASSACHUSETTS AVE., NW WASHINGTON, DC 20001 T 202.344.4000 F 202.344.8300 www.venable.com March 20, 2017 Meredith L. Boylan T 202-344-8062 F 202.344.8300 mlboylan cr venable.com Mr. Scott Harris Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543 Re: Stacey Johnson v. Wendy Kelley, No. 16-6496 Dear Mr. Harris: Notice Of Change Of Address Please take Notice that effective Monday, FebNua~y 27, 2017, Counsel of Record to Petitioners Don Davis, Stacey Johnson, Jack Jones, Ledell Lee, Jason McGehee; Te~~ick Nooner, Bruce Ward, Marcel Williams, and Kenneth Williams moved to the following address: Meredith L. Boylan (dob 3/8/76) Counsel of RecoNd George Kostolampros VENABLE LLP 600 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20001 All telephone numbers, email addresses, and facsimile numbers will remain the same. Respectfully submitted, Meredith L. Boylan, Esq. Counsel of Record to Petitioners Don Davis, Stacey Johnson, Jack Jones, Ledell Lee, Jason McGehee, Te~~^rckNoone~, Bruce Ward, MaNcel Williams, and Kenneth Williams