The Supreme Court refused Monday to directly consider whether the drug combination used in executions in the United States amounts to unconstitutional cruel punishment. The justices had already agreed to hear arguments in April in a case brought by Florida death row inmate Clarence Hill about the procedure for lethal injection challenges. Monday's decision, which came on a separate appeal by Hill's lawyer, has little practical significance because Hill's other case is pending.
February 28, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The Supreme Court refused Monday to directly consider whether the drug combination used in executions across the United States amounts to unconstitutional cruel punishment.
The justices had already agreed to hear arguments in April in a case brought by Florida death row inmate Clarence Hill about the procedure for lethal injection challenges to be filed in federal court.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
