Capital Punishment
Ybarra v. Warden
This case presents the question of whether the execution of a capital defendant with serious mental illness violates Article I, section 6 of the Nevada Constitution, which prohibits cruel or unusual punishment. The ºìÐÓÊÓÆµâ€™s Capital Punishment Project and State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the ºìÐÓÊÓÆµ of Nevada, filed an amicus brief arguing that a plain reading of Article I, section 6 of the Nevada Constitution provides broader protections than the Eighth Amendment and should be interpreted to establish a categorical exemption from execution for this population.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn ºìÐÓÊÓÆµ Capital Punishment
All Cases
63 Capital Punishment Cases

Court Case
Aug 2025
Capital Punishment
Immigrants' Rights
African Communities Together v. Lyons
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2025

Capital Punishment
Immigrants' Rights
African Communities Together v. Lyons

U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025
Capital Punishment
Anthony Wainwright v. Governor of Florida et al.
Anthony Wainwright, who was facing imminent execution in Florida, attempted to file a petition in the Florida Supreme Court with the assistance of his pro bono counsel of choice. The court dismissed the petition only because his court-appointed refused to file it, despite the fact that Mr. Wainwright was entitled to do so under Florida law. He asked the United States Supreme Court to review his case to decide whether the Florida court’s action deprived him his constitutional right of access to the courts and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The United States Supreme Court refused to review the case, and the State of Florida executed him on June 10, 2025.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025

Capital Punishment
Anthony Wainwright v. Governor of Florida et al.
Anthony Wainwright, who was facing imminent execution in Florida, attempted to file a petition in the Florida Supreme Court with the assistance of his pro bono counsel of choice. The court dismissed the petition only because his court-appointed refused to file it, despite the fact that Mr. Wainwright was entitled to do so under Florida law. He asked the United States Supreme Court to review his case to decide whether the Florida court’s action deprived him his constitutional right of access to the courts and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The United States Supreme Court refused to review the case, and the State of Florida executed him on June 10, 2025.

U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025
Capital Punishment
Glossip v. Oklahoma
This long-running Oklahoma death-penalty case raised two issues:
1) Would the State of Oklahoma be permitted to execute Glossip, despite overwhelming evidence that he is innocent, and despite a confession by the State’s Attorney General that the state obtained his conviction by hiding crucial evidence impeaching its star witness?; and
2) Would the Court reaffirm its longstanding commitment to Due-Process-Clause precedent requiring the government to disclose favorable evidence in its possession to the accused and to correct false testimony introduced against the accused?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025

Capital Punishment
Glossip v. Oklahoma
This long-running Oklahoma death-penalty case raised two issues:
1) Would the State of Oklahoma be permitted to execute Glossip, despite overwhelming evidence that he is innocent, and despite a confession by the State’s Attorney General that the state obtained his conviction by hiding crucial evidence impeaching its star witness?; and
2) Would the Court reaffirm its longstanding commitment to Due-Process-Clause precedent requiring the government to disclose favorable evidence in its possession to the accused and to correct false testimony introduced against the accused?

U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025
Capital Punishment
Tabler v. Lumpkin
In Tabler v. Lumpkin, the ºìÐÓÊÓÆµ represented a Texas death row prisoner whose lawyers refused to represent him at a hearing to determine his capacity to decide whether to give up his state post-conviction appeals, leaving him effectively unrepresented at that hearing. Our petition asked the Supreme Court to review Richard Tabler’s case and to hold that when a defendant’s lawyers abandon him, his waiver of further appeals should not bar his access to federal habeas corpus review of the constitutionality of his conviction.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025

Capital Punishment
Tabler v. Lumpkin
In Tabler v. Lumpkin, the ºìÐÓÊÓÆµ represented a Texas death row prisoner whose lawyers refused to represent him at a hearing to determine his capacity to decide whether to give up his state post-conviction appeals, leaving him effectively unrepresented at that hearing. Our petition asked the Supreme Court to review Richard Tabler’s case and to hold that when a defendant’s lawyers abandon him, his waiver of further appeals should not bar his access to federal habeas corpus review of the constitutionality of his conviction.