Amy Howe

Apr 21 2022

Court allows Texas to execute man who spent 31 years on death row

The Supreme Court on Thursday turned down a request from a 78-year-old Texas inmate to block his execution. Justice Stephen Breyer, who has previously questioned the constitutionality of the death penalty and criticized lengthy delays in how it is carried out, wrote a one-paragraph statement in which he reiterated those concerns. But neither Breyer nor any other justice publicly dissented from the court’s order allowing the execution to proceed.

Carl Buntion was executed by lethal injection in Huntsville, Texas, a few hours after the court’s order. He was convicted and sentenced to death in 1991 for the shooting death of James Irby, a Houston police officer. In 2009, a Texas appeals court ordered a new sentencing hearing, but three years later, a jury again sentenced him to death. After his appeals and efforts to seek post-conviction relief were unsuccessful, the state set April 21, 2022, as his execution date.

Buntion went to federal court earlier this month, seeking to challenge the constitutionality of the state’s efforts to execute him after 31 years on death row – 20 of which were spent in solitary confinement. He contended that executing him now would violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment, particularly when the state was responsible for the delay.

The state dismissed Buntion’s argument as a last-ditch effort to stave off his execution. It urged the justices to allow the execution to go forward, stressing that the Supreme Court “has never recognized a constitutional challenge to a death sentence based on the length of time a petitioner has served on death row awaiting execution.”

In his brief statement regarding the decision not to stay Buntion’s execution, Breyer wrote that Buntion’s case “illustrates a serious legal and practical problem with the death penalty as it is currently administered.” The court, Breyer noted, has “described even four weeks of waiting in prison under the threat of execution as ‘one of the most horrible feelings to which [a person] can be subjected.’” But Buntion, Breyer observed, “has suffered under such conditions for decades,” raising “serious questions” about whether the death penalty “complies with the Constitution’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.”

This post is also published on SCOTUSblog.

Amy L Howe
Until September 2016, Amy served as the editor and reporter for SCOTUSblog, a blog devoted to coverage of the Supreme Court of the United States; she continues to serve as an independent contractor and reporter for SCOTUSblog. Before turning to full-time blogging, she served as counsel in over two dozen merits cases at the Supreme Court and argued two cases there. From 2004 until 2011, she co-taught Supreme Court litigation at Stanford Law School; from 2005 until 2013, she co-taught a similar class at Harvard Law School. She has also served as an adjunct professor at American University’s Washington College of Law and Vanderbilt Law School. Amy is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and holds a master’s degree in Arab Studies and a law degree from Georgetown University.
Tweets by @AHoweBlogger
Recent ScotusBlog Posts from Amy
  • Court declines to block execution of Texas man who argued that jurors engaged in anti-Hispanic bias
  • Court schedules final two argument sessions of 2022-23 term
  • Justices request federal government’s views on Texas and Florida social-media laws
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court declines to block execution of Texas man who argued that jurors engaged in anti-Hispanic bias
  • Court schedules final two argument sessions of 2022-23 term
  • Justices request federal government’s views on Texas and Florida social-media laws
  • Justices were not asked to swear under penalty of perjury that they didn’t leak Dobbs opinion
  • Supreme Court investigators fail to identify who leaked Dobbs opinion
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies