Elledge v. Florida

Background

A man sentenced to death in Florida has spent more than 23 years under a death sentence and asked the Justices to decide whether that long delay makes execution unconstitutional. The dissent describes three successful appeals that together account for 18 of those years and a fourth appeal that accounts for the remaining five years; that fourth appeal produced a 4–2 split in the Florida Supreme Court, and a filing in opposition acknowledged that some delays resulted from the petitioner’s litigation.

Reasoning

The central question was whether executing someone after such a long delay violates the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The dissenting Justice argued the delay is highly unusual compared with historical practice and cited examples showing executions once occurred much sooner. He said the nearly generation-long threat of death can make an execution especially cruel and that, after such a delay, the punishment may stop serving ordinary goals of punishment. The dissent also relied on foreign cases and historical materials to show delay can be constitutionally significant and would have granted review.

Real world impact

Because the Court declined to hear the case, the lower-court outcome remains in place and the petitioner will not receive relief from the Supreme Court now. The decision leaves state procedures and lengthy waits on death row unchanged for the time being. The dissent warned that resolving the delay question could affect whether foreign courts will extradite people to face capital punishment in the United States because of concerns about long waits.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Breyer dissented from the denial of review, arguing strongly that the Court should take the case to decide whether a 23-year delay makes an execution unconstitutional, and he emphasized history, foreign precedent, and practical consequences.