Jones v. State
701 So. 2d 76 (1997)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A method of execution does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment if it does not involve the wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain. An isolated, botched execution caused by human error does not render the method itself unconstitutional, particularly when the state implements corrective procedures to prevent recurrence.
Facts:
- During the execution of Pedro Medina, smoke and a 4-5 inch flame emanated from the headpiece of the electric chair.
- An investigation concluded that the flame and smoke were caused by insufficient saline solution on the sponge in the headpiece, which was a departure from standard procedure.
- Expert testimony indicated that Medina's brain was instantly depolarized, and he suffered no conscious pain despite the external manifestation of the malfunction.
- Following Medina's execution, the Florida Department of Corrections adopted new, formal written protocols for testing the electric chair and for execution day procedures.
- Engineers who examined the electric chair's apparatus, equipment, and circuitry after the Medina execution found it to be in excellent working condition.
- The trial court found that the death chamber staff was qualified and competent to carry out executions under the new protocols.
Procedural Posture:
- Leo Alexander Jones, a death row inmate, filed a petition in the Supreme Court of Florida challenging the constitutionality of the electric chair.
- The Supreme Court of Florida relinquished jurisdiction to a state trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the claim.
- After a four-day hearing, the trial court entered an order denying Jones's claim.
- Jones appealed that order to the Supreme Court of Florida.
- Finding that Jones was unable to effectively cross-examine state witnesses or present his own experts, the Supreme Court again relinquished jurisdiction to the trial court for a second evidentiary hearing.
- The trial court held a second four-day hearing.
- Following the second hearing, the trial judge entered a final order again denying Jones's claim that the electric chair is unconstitutional.
- Jones appealed that final order to the Supreme Court of Florida, which is the subject of this brief.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does execution by electrocution in Florida's electric chair, in its present condition, constitute cruel or unusual punishment under the Florida and United States Constitutions?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. Electrocution in Florida's electric chair, in its present condition, is not cruel or unusual punishment. The standard for a constitutional violation is the 'wanton infliction of unnecessary pain' or a method involving 'torture or a lingering death,' as established in Gregg v. Georgia and Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber. The record shows substantial evidence that the incident during Pedro Medina's execution was an anomaly caused by human error (insufficient saline on the sponge), not a flaw inherent in the method of electrocution. The State has since implemented new, rigorous protocols to ensure such an error does not happen again. The evidence supports the finding that, when performed correctly, electrocution causes instantaneous unconsciousness and a painless death, thus it does not meet the high threshold for being cruel or unusual punishment.
Concurring - Harding, J.
No. While Florida's electric chair is not currently unconstitutional, the legislature should amend state law to provide for lethal injection as an alternative method of execution. This would avert a potential 'constitutional train wreck' if a court were to declare electrocution unconstitutional in the future. Without an alternative, all existing death sentences might have to be commuted to life imprisonment, which would be contrary to the intent of the people of Florida.
Dissenting - Shaw, J.
Yes. Execution by electrocution as practiced in Florida violates the state constitution's prohibition against 'cruel or unusual' punishment. The Florida Constitution's use of 'or' means a punishment is forbidden if it is either cruel or unusual. The botched executions of both Jesse Tafero and Pedro Medina, representing 11% of recent executions, involved unnecessary violence, mutilation, and burning, making the method 'cruel on its face.' Furthermore, the method is 'unusual' as only a handful of governments in the world still use electrocution, and it has been condemned by veterinary associations for euthanizing animals. This track record proves the electric chair is a 'dinosaur' unfit for use.
Dissenting - Kogan, C.J.
Yes. The dissent concurs with Justice Shaw and emphasizes the compelling analysis of the Florida Corrections Commission. The Commission, after surveying other states, recommended that the legislature phase out the electric chair in favor of lethal injection, which is considered a more humane method of execution.
Dissenting - Anstead, J.
Yes. The majority improperly limited the legal inquiry to the single botched execution of Medina, rather than the constitutionality of electrocution as a method. The test is whether a punishment involves the unnecessary infliction of pain or is inconsistent with society's evolving standards of decency. Electrocution fails both prongs because a more humane method (lethal injection) is available and because its use has become objectively 'unusual' in the modern world, fitting the description of a 'rack and screw type of punishment device' from the dark ages.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high constitutional bar for challenging a method of execution, focusing the analysis on whether the method is inherently designed to inflict wanton pain rather than on isolated accidents. By attributing the malfunction in the Medina execution to correctable human error, the court preserved the constitutionality of electrocution in Florida for the time being. However, the strong dissents and the concurring opinion's call for legislative action signaled the growing untenability of the electric chair, reflecting a broader national trend toward lethal injection and foreshadowing Florida's eventual change in its method of execution.
Unlock the full brief for Jones v. State