Senate Bill 0360c1
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Florida Senate - 1998 CS for SB's 360 & 350
By the Committee on Criminal Justice and Senators Burt, Klein,
Bronson, Campbell, Crist, Gutman, Horne, Turner and Silver
307-1626-98
1 A bill to be entitled
2 An act relating to execution; amending s.
3 922.10, F.S.; providing for execution by means
4 of lethal injection if electrocution is held to
5 be unconstitutional; providing legislative
6 intent; providing an effective date.
7
8 WHEREAS, the Legislature finds that the existing method
9 of carrying out a sentence of death in Florida is by
10 electrocution, and
11 WHEREAS, the Legislature has previously determined that
12 death by electrocution is the preferred method of carrying out
13 the death penalty, and the death penalty should be carried out
14 in a swift and sure manner, and
15 WHEREAS, the Florida Supreme Court, in Jones v.
16 Butterworth, Case No. 90,231 (October 20, 1997), has held
17 death by electrocution to be a constitutional method of
18 imposing the death penalty in Florida, and
19 WHEREAS, the Legislature intends to ensure that the
20 lawful punishment of death imposed on persons in this state is
21 carried out, and considers it to be appropriate to provide an
22 alternative method for imposing death only in the event that
23 the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of
24 Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, or the Florida Supreme Court
25 declares death by electrocution to be unconstitutional, and
26 WHEREAS, changing the method of carrying out the death
27 penalty both for those previously sentenced and for those who
28 will be sentenced in the future is merely procedural and does
29 not increase the quantum of punishment imposed upon a
30 defendant and therefore does not violate the prohibition
31 against ex post facto laws under the Constitution of the
1
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Florida Senate - 1998 CS for SB's 360 & 350
307-1626-98
1 United States, Malloy v. South Carolina, 237 U.S. 180 (1915),
2 and Ex Parte Kenneth Granviel, 561 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. App.
3 1978), and
4 WHEREAS, in the case of Malloy v. South Carolina, 237
5 U.S. 180 (1915), the United States Supreme Court held that a
6 change in the method of execution does not change the penalty
7 for the crime of murder, but only the method of inducing
8 death, when under such a change some of the odious features
9 incident to the old method are abated by the new method, and
10 WHEREAS, the Florida Supreme Court has previously
11 declared, in the case of Dobbert v. State, 375 So.2d 1069
12 (Fla. 1979), affirmed in Dobbert v. Florida, 432 U.S. 282,
13 that changing the practices and procedures of the application
14 of the death penalty statute does not violate the provisions
15 of Article X, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution or the "ex
16 post facto" clauses of the Florida and United States
17 Constitutions, NOW, THEREFORE,
18
19 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
20
21 Section 1. Section 922.10, Florida Statutes, is
22 amended to read:
23 922.10 Execution of death sentence; executioner.--
24 (1) A death sentence shall be executed by
25 electrocution. If electrocution is held to be unconstitutional
26 by the Florida Supreme Court, the United States Court of
27 Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, or the United States Supreme
28 Court, all persons sentenced to death for a capital crime
29 shall be executed by lethal injection. The superintendent
30 warden of the state prison shall designate the executioner.
31 Information which, if released, would identify the executioner
2
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Florida Senate - 1998 CS for SB's 360 & 350
307-1626-98
1 is confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1)
2 and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. The warrant
3 authorizing the execution shall be read to the convicted
4 person immediately before execution.
5 (2) The provisions of the opinion and all points of
6 law decided by the United States Supreme Court in Malloy v.
7 South Carolina, 237 U.S. 180(1915), finding that the Ex Post
8 Facto Clause of the United States Constitution is not violated
9 by a legislatively enacted change in the method of execution
10 for a sentence of death validly imposed for previously
11 committed capital murders, are adopted by the Legislature as
12 the statute law of this state.
13 (3) A change in the method of execution does not
14 increase the punishment or modify the statutory penalty of
15 death for capital murder. Any legislative change to the method
16 of execution for the crime of capital murder does not violate
17 s. 10, Art. I, or s. 9, Art. X of the State Constitution.
18 Section 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a
19 law.
20
21 STATEMENT OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES CONTAINED IN
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
22 Senate Bill's 360 and 350
23
24 . References the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eleventh Circuit for the purpose of providing that if
25 that court declares electrocution to be unconstitutional,
lethal injection shall be the method of execution.
26
. Adopts the opinion and points of law in Malloy v. South
27 Carolina, 237 U.S. 180 (1915), in which the United States
Supreme Court held that a legislative change in the
28 method of execution does not violate federal ex post
facto law.
29
. Provides that a change in the method of execution does
30 not increase the punishment or modify the death penalty,
nor does it violate Article I, Section 10, or Article X,
31 Section 9, Florida Constitution.
3