Evans v. Bennett

1979-04-05

Headline: Denies emergency request to halt Alabama execution, finding federal petition filed and no new execution date set, so an immediate stay was unnecessary.

Holding: The Court denied the mother’s emergency request to stop the Alabama execution because a federal petition had been filed and no new state execution date had been set, so a Supreme Court stay was unnecessary.

Real World Impact:

Leaves immediate delay to lower federal or state courts that receive the petition.
Does not extend the temporary stay from this Court past 5:00 p.m. on April 13, 1979.
Keeps the underlying federal challenge unresolved by the Supreme Court at this time.

Topics: death penalty, stays of execution, federal appeals, state court scheduling

Summary

Background

A mother filed an emergency request asking the Court to stop the scheduled execution of her son in Alabama. She says her son signed and mailed a verified petition seeking federal review and a stay on April 11, 1979. At that time, the Alabama Supreme Court had not set a new execution date. A temporary stay in this Court was due to expire at 5:00 p.m. on April 13, 1979.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Supreme Court should extend or grant a further stay right away. The Court concluded that, because the verified federal petition had been filed and no new execution date existed in the state court, there was no present need for the Court to grant relief. The result is that the emergency request was denied as unnecessary. Justice Powell did not participate in the consideration or decision.

Real world impact

The ruling leaves any immediate delay in the hands of the lower federal or state courts that receive the filed petition. The denial does not decide the merits of any underlying federal challenge; it simply declines to continue the temporary stay from this Court. If a lower court grants a stay, that would make this application to the Supreme Court moot.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan wrote a brief concurrence emphasizing the mailed petition and the lack of a set execution date, noting those facts made further action by this Court unnecessary.