Skip to main content

A day of infamy at Florida’s Death Court | Editorial

"The armor of capital punishment is rotting away, revealing a ghoulish presence that has nothing to do with preventing crime. It is bloodlust, nothing more."

Thursday was a day of infamy at the Florida Supreme Court. Over one anguished dissent, five arch-conservative justices discarded a nearly 50-year-old precedent in order to approve more executions, not caring whether the prisoners actually deserve to die.

The justices renounced their duty to review death sentences for proportionality — that is, whether execution would be too severe in comparison to other cases.

The court adopted that policy in 1973 as its basis for upholding Florida’s new death penalty law, which had been enacted after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1972 decision that capital punishment throughout the United States was arbitrary and capricious.

What Florida’s death court did Thursday belies the old promise to ensure consistency between who lives and who dies for similar crimes under similar circumstances. It sets Florida far apart from most of the other states that still execute people. And it demonstrates that capital punishment in Florida is beyond justification or repair and must be abolished.

The justices who took part in the travesty should be voted out of office, starting with Carlos Muñiz, the only one on Tuesday’s ballot.

The court made its ruling in its 50th consecutive rejection of an appeal from a death row inmate, in this case, Jonathan Huey Lawrence, 45, a murderer from Santa Rosa County.

The Legislature requires the court to review every death sentence. In 1973, the court took that to mean that it should consider more than just the usual fine points of law, that it should also consider proportionality across racial, sex, geographical lines, and the circumstances of each crime.

“No longer will one man die and another live on the basis of race, or a woman live and a man die on the basis of sex,” Justice James C. Adkins Jr., promised in the old majority opinion.

Largely because of that assurance, the U.S. Supreme Court let Florida resume executions. There have been 99 so far. However, dozens of other prisoners have been re-sentenced to life in consideration of disparities in sentencing.

In March 2014, however, the Florida court’s most conservative justices, Charles Canady and Ricky Polston, argued that proportionality review violates a 1998 amendment to the Florida Constitution that the Legislature intended to keep the death penalty from being overturned.

It requires Florida courts to interpret the U.S. Constitution’s provision against cruel or unusual punishment according to how the U.S. Supreme Court does. That court ruled in an appeal from another state that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t require proportionality review. So, said Canady and Polston, Florida must not practice it.

Canady and Polston were outvoted 5-2 on that occasion, but their dissent was an open invitation to the attorney general’s office to revisit the issue once enough justices were replaced by conservative appointees of Govs. Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis. Jorge Labarga is the only remaining moderate and the last voice of decency.

It was again his turn to dissent Thursday, as he had in three earlier decisions of the new majority that mean more death sentences will be carried out. He called the Lawrence decision “the most consequential step yet in dismantling the reasonable safeguards” in Florida’s death penalty law.

“I cannot overstate how quickly and consequentially the majority’s decisions have impacted death penalty law in Florida,” he wrote.

Labarga argued that even though the U.S. Supreme Court does not require proportionality review, it has never held it unconstitutional. Moreover, 15 of the other 25 death penalty states conduct proportionality review, including Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia.

In line with “evolving standards of decency,” Labarga said, Florida has “in many instances” given its citizens greater rights and protections than the minimum required by the U.S. Supreme Court. That, he mourned, “has been significantly, if not completely repudiated by this court’s various opinions” in recent death penalty cases.

The court’s 1973 promise of fairness was in one sense difficult to keep. For the court rarely, if ever, sees cases of murderers sentenced to life in prison because those cases end at the five district courts of appeal. But there are many lifers in Florida prisons whose crimes were more brutal than those committed by some on death row.

Among them: Clem Beauchamp, sentenced to three consecutive life sentences in Palm Beach County four years ago for the murders of his girlfriend and her two children, whose decomposing bodies were found in luggage dumped in a canal.

The Lawrence decision is all the more tragic because the last resort of executive clemency has become a dead letter in Florida. Not since 1985 has a Florida governor commuted a death sentence to life in prison.

Apart from Muñiz, Canady and Polston, the other death-dealing justices Thursday were Alan Lawson, a Scott appointee; and John Couriel, named recently by DeSantis. The governor’s newest justice, Jamie Grosshans, did not participate.

We had already recommended a vote against Muñiz’s retention as a way for the public to protest how DeSantis, and Scott before him, have made right-wing credentials, including membership in the Federalist Society, a litmus test for appointment to the bench.

The Lawrence decision is an insult to Florida’s sovereignty. The state’s highest court is taking what the U.S. Supreme Court never said as a pretext to invalidate a fail-safe provision against random cruelty in the application of society’s only irreversible punishment.

The armor of capital punishment is rotting away, revealing a ghoulish presence that has nothing to do with preventing crime. It is bloodlust, nothing more.

Source: sun-sentinel.com, Editorial Board, October 30, 2020. Editorials are the opinion of the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board and written by one of its members or a designee. The Editorial Board consists of Editorial Page Editor Rosemary O’Hara, Dan Sweeney, Steve Bousquet and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson.


🚩 | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.


Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!



"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde

Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term:   Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight.  In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution.  Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order. 

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

Alabama | Judge bars nitrogen gas execution, says method is unconstitutionally cruel

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A federal judge on Tuesday permanently blocked Alabama from executing an inmate with nitrogen gas after declaring it violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. District Judge Emily Marks issued the ruling hours after an appeals court reversed her initial finding that the method was constitutional. Marks permanently enjoined the state from executing Jeffrey Lee, 49, by nitrogen gas. He was scheduled to be executed Thursday. The decision, for now, blocks the use of the controversial new execution method that the state has championed since 2024, but the issue will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Idaho will soon turn to firing squad executions. Police will pull the triggers

Trained members of Idaho law enforcement with demonstrated firearms proficiency are expected to fill slots for carrying out the death penalty by firing squad as the state prison system transitions to the controversial execution method next month.  Six volunteers certified for no less than three years apiece through Peace Officer Standards and Training, or POST, will be recruited to ensure the Idaho Department of Correction is ready to comply with a state law that prioritizes shooting prisoners to death over lethal injection starting July 1.  No one on the team may have faced disciplinary action over firearms, use of force, or related conduct over the prior year, according to new execution protocols the prison system released this week. 

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.