Va. executes killer who challenged injections

Lawyer Blogs

A killer who argued Virginia's procedures for lethal injection were unconstitutional was executed Thursday after a federal appeals court upheld the primary method of capital punishment in the nation's second-busiest death chamber.

Christopher Scott Emmett, 36, was pronounced dead at 9:07 p.m. He was convicted of beating a co-worker to death with a brass lamp in 2001 so he could steal the man's money to buy crack cocaine.

Emmett's appeal was the first to require a federal appeals court to interpret a U.S. Supreme Court decision in April that upheld Kentucky's three-drug method of lethal injection and apply it to another state's procedures.

Gov. Tim Kaine declined to intervene with the sentence being carried out.

"Tell my family and friends I love them, tell the governor he just lost my vote," Emmett said in the chamber before he died. "Y'all hurry this along, I'm dying to get out of here."

The lethal injection appeared to go as planned. Emmett was pronounced dead about five minutes after he was first sedated.

His attorneys claimed that Virginia's use of lethal injection amounted to cruel and unusual punishment because of the possibility that paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs could be administered before inmates are rendered unconscious by another drug.

Unlike Kentucky, Virginia does not allow for a second dose of sodium thiopental, which results in a deep, coma-like unconsciousness, even when a second round of the other drugs is required. Virginia also administers the three drugs more quickly than Kentucky.

In 10 of the 70 lethal injections performed in Virginia before this year, a second dose of the last two drugs was given because the inmate did not die within a few minutes after the heart-stopping drug was administered, according to court papers.

Earlier this month, a divided panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond ruled that Virginia's protocol was similar enough to Kentucky's that it would not cause inmates excruciating pain. Emmett's attorneys had asked the full court to review the case, but justices voted 6-4 against the full hearing.

Judge Roger Gregory, writing in favor of the full court hearing Emmett's appeal, said that the Supreme Court found the sodium thiopental "essential to the humanity of Kentucky's procedure," and that Virginia did not offer safeguards comparable to those used in Kentucky to ensure that inmates didn't experience excruciating pain.

Emmett was the 102nd inmate executed in Virginia since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Only Texas has executed more prisoners.

Related listings

  • In Portland, Ore., parking laws include police

    In Portland, Ore., parking laws include police

    Lawyer Blogs 07/24/2008

    Portland police are not above the parking laws, even if they're hungry.Officer Chadd Stensgaard, who parked his patrol car illegally while making a dinner-break stop at a Japanese restaurant, must pay a $35 fine, Traffic Court Judge Terry Hannon rule...

  • Giuliani's son sues Duke over golf team dismissal

    Giuliani's son sues Duke over golf team dismissal

    Lawyer Blogs 07/24/2008

    The son of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is suing Duke University, claiming his golf coach manufactured accusations against him to justify kicking him off the team to whittle the squad.Andrew Giuliani, a 22-year-old rising senior, contends...

  • Court affirms online content law unconstitutional

    Court affirms online content law unconstitutional

    Lawyer Blogs 07/23/2008

    A federal appeals court Tuesday agreed with a lower court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional a 1998 law intended to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet.The decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Co...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read