- Amicus Press - https://www.amicus.press -

Bucklew v. Precythe

Certiorari Granted on April 30, 2018

The date for argument has not yet been set.

  • Amicus Briefs in support of Petitioner or Neither Party are due within 45 days of grant of certiorari, which would be June 14, 2018.

  • Amicus Briefs in support of Respondents are due within 30 days of the filing of the Petitioner's Merits Brief, which would be July 14, 2018 if the Petitioner files on its deadline.

Counsel for Petitioner

Robert N. Hochman

Sidley Austin, LLP

One South Dearborn Street

Chicago, IL 60603

(312) 853-2936

rhochman@sidley.com

Party name: Russell Bucklew

Counsel for Respondent

D. John Sauer

Office of the Attorney General

Supreme Court Building, 207 West High Street

P.O. Box 899

Jefferson City, MO 65102

573-751-3321

john.sauer@ago.mo.gov

Party name: Anne Precythe, et al.

Question 1

Should a court evaluating an as-applied challenge to a state's method of execution based on an inmate's rare and severe medical condition assume that medical personnel are competent to manage his condition and that the procedure will go as intended? Must evidence comparing a state's proposed method of execution with an alternative proposed by an inmate be offered via a single witness, or should a court at summary judgment look to the record as a whole to determine whether a factfinder could conclude that the two methods significantly differ in the risks they pose to the inmate? Does the Eighth Amendment require an inmate to prove an adequate alternative method of execution when raising an as-applied challenge to the state's proposed method of execution based on his rare and severe medical condition?

Question 2

Whether petitioner met his burden under Glossip v. Gross, 576 U.S. ___ (2015), to prove what procedures would be used to administer his proposed alternative method of execution, the severity and duration of pain likely to be produced, and how they compare to the state’s method of execution.