Federal Judge OKs Ohio Execution Method

That's the title of Alan Johnson's report in the Columbus Dispatch.  It's subtitled, "Prisoner didn't prove it is painful."

Ohio's lethal-injection system is flawed but not unconstitutional, a federal judge has ruled, clearing the way for at least one and possibly more executions.

U.S. District Judge Gregory Frost said yesterday that convicted killer Kenneth Biros had not sufficiently made his case that Ohio's three-drug execution process would cause extreme pain, rendering it cruel and unusual punishment and thus unconstitutional.

The ruling means prosecutors can seek a new execution date for Biros. Other Death Row inmates also joined Biros' case in hopes of obtaining stays of execution.

Biros, 50, was scheduled to be executed on Jan. 23, 2007, for the mutilation killing of 22-year-old Tami Engstrom near Warren in 1991. Based on an appeal by Biros' attorneys, Frost stopped the execution on Dec. 21, 2006.

Frost held a hearing in Columbus last month at which Ohio prisons chief Terry Collins, members of the state's execution team and medical experts testified.

Frost warned state officials that they shouldn't consider his ruling a complete victory.

"Ohio's method of execution by lethal injection is a flawed system," Frost said in his 159-page ruling. "The weaknesses that pervade this system are not so profound, however, that they ... present this court with a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution."

"Judge lifts Ohio execution delay," is the AP report via the Newark Advocate.

Ohio's execution process is a flawed system that raises troubling concerns, but those problems do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost paves the way for the possible execution of a man who mutilated his victim and left her body parts in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

In a 159-page ruling, Frost said there are problems with the way Ohio executes inmates, both with written protocols and the training the state provides the execution team.

Frost also said it's possible further evidence could prove the process constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

But he said condemned killer Kenneth Biros has failed for to demonstrate he would experience severe pain under the system.

With the decision, Frost found that Ohio's system meets the standards for a constitutional process laid out by the U.S. Supreme Court a year ago.

"Ohio's method of execution by lethal injection is a system replete with inherent flaws that raise profound concerns and present unnecessary risks," Frost wrote, "even if it appears unlikely that Biros will demonstrate that those risks rise to the level of violating the United States Constitution."

Biros plans an appeal, said his Cleveland attorney, John Parker. The Ohio Attorney General's office declined to comment.

You can view Judge Frost's order, in Adobe .pdf format, here.  Earlier coverage of lethal injection issues in Ohio is here; more related posts in StandDown's lethal injection category index.