Ohio Supreme Court: Condemned may not challenge lethal-injection method of execution

There is no basis under Ohio law to challenge the lethal injection method of execution, a divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled today.

In a 5-2 decision, the court said the General Assembly "has not yet provided an Ohio law cause of action for Ohio courts to process challenges to a lethal-injection protocol."

However, there are "several established methods for an Ohio death penalty defendant to receive state review of his or her case," the court said.

The question was referred to the court from a federal judge in a suit filed by Michael Dean Scott, a Stark County man sentenced to death for killing 2 men in 1999.

Outgoing Chief Justice Eric Brown filed a strong dissenting opinion, arguing that it is "unthinkable that there could be no judicial forum in Ohio" to challenge lethal injection. Justice Paul E. Pfeifer, the court's senior member, also dissented.

"Cases such as this," Brown said, "are the measuring stick of our civilization, in which we stake the boundaries of our government's obligation to protect the weakest, the least popular, and the worst of its members."

He said the majority on the court "abdicates this court's responsibility to federal courts" by refusing to settle the matter.

In another death penalty case, the court rejected a suit filed by attorneys representing convicted killer Romell Broom (left) that be removed from Death Row because the state tried unsuccessfully to execute him 15 months ago.

Without comment, the court unanimously turned down the request by attorneys Timothy F. Sweeney of Cleveland S. Adele Shank of Columbus.

The suit contended that Broom's constitutional rights were violated and that he suffered "unnecessary pain, suffering and distress" when attempts to execute him on Sept. 15, 2009, were aborted after two hours at the order of Gov. Ted Strickland.

A prison medical team tried in vain for two tense hours to attach IV lines. Broom, 54, was jabbed 18 times in the arms and legs with injection needles before a prison official recommended that the procedure be halted.

Broom's attorneys argued the state did not have properly trained personnel on the execution team, failed to follow its own protocols, and had no backup plan.

"It was a form of torture that exposed Broom to the prospect of a slow, lingering death, not the quick and painless one he was promised and to which he was constitutionally entitled," the lawsuit said.

His attorneys asked that his death sentence be overturned and that Broom be released from Death Row and sent to the general prison population.

A new execution date has not been scheduled for Broom. He is under a death sentence for abducting and murdering Tryna Middleton on Sept. 21, 1984, in Cleveland.

Source: Columbus Dispatch, December 2, 2010