Arkansas Blog

So what now becomes the timetable?

This means that perhaps some public notice will be given about the process. I hope the Department of Correction doesn't operate like Game and Fish. They'll have the meeting late Friday and try to execute the following Monday. What constitutes "public notice" has changed enough that there needs to be a public review on the process. Burying things in the paper won't cut it. Putting it on the front page of the demogaz doesn't mean most people that I know will ever see it. That's where you get the old news.

Max, what happened to the Times' pledge to start posting more source documents online ? In cases like this it would be easy to post all the pleadings so that we can better understand the issues.

While this isn't an original document - a helpful guide to the Administrative Procedures Act can be found at: http://www.arkbar.com/Ark_Lawyer_Mag/Articles/AdminProcedureWinter04.html

To see why the Department of Correction wants this expedited -- look at the steps that must be taken by another state agency to get policy enacted: http://www.healthyarkansas.com/rules_regs/apa_summary_2008.pdf

From what I can tell, the issue in this case is whether the administrative procedures act applies at all in this for execution "policies." Other states specifically exempt execution procedures from the administrative procedures act - A quick review of Arkansas' Administrative Procedures Act makes me think it does not apply to prisoners. Why? Because the only class of persons specifically excluded is....inmates. I'm sure Mr. Willams' lawyers have come up with some interesting argument why this should not apply to him - but without the briefs, we will just be left in the dark. If I had to guess, they will say this exclusion deprives their client of due process.

§ 25-15-212. Administrative adjudication--Judicial review

(a) In cases of adjudication, any person, except an inmate under sentence to the custody of the Department of Correction, who considers himself or herself injured in his or her person, business, or property by final agency action shall be entitled to judicial review of the action under this subchapter. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit other means of review provided by law.

Of course, in Clinton v. Bonds, the Court said that despite the clear intent of that statute, even inmates are entitled to judicial review when there is a constitutional issue at stake in an adminstrative case. This issue before the Court is whether there is any administrative issue here at all.

More than you wanted to know on this issue:

The docket can be found here: http://courts.state.ar.us/dockets/docket_info.cfm?case_number=%2008-1031

What is the timetable now? Because the case is not being expedited, Williams' brief isn't due until October 2, after which the State gets to reply, and then the Court usually takes several months before they even begin to look at it. Does this mean that the execution is stayed? Not necessarily.

How can this not mean the execution is stayed? Are you saying they could still find a way to execute this coming Tuesday?

I think the Gov. voluntarily stayed the execution based on this court case yesterday.