Breaking News

First Lethal Drug Execution since Glossip v. Gross
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

David Zink execution

Summary: State lawyers and the US Supreme Court made it clear in the dismissal of Zink’s appeals that citing Breyer’s dissent wasn’t a valid argument to be saved from the death penalty.

David Zink’s final chance to appeal his death sentence was turned down by the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday night. His execution was at 6 pm. Zink was found guilty for abducting, sexually assaulting and murdering a 19-year-old woman in 2001. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon turned down his request for clemency as well. The Supreme Court did not comment or dissent on the multiple appeals from his lawyers, Elizabeth Carlyle and Richard Sindel.


His lawyers had tried to get U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer on their side after he dissented the recent death penalty ruling. Breyer views the death penalty as unconstitutional because there is no way of knowing how effective the lethal injection drugs are at preventing the individual from feeling pain.

In the Glossip v. Gross ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the using the drugs for lethal injections and thus making the death penalty being constitutional. Breyer’s dissent included the factors of long delay, arbitrariness, and the possibility of innocence in some that have been executed as reasons that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment.

In the petition, Carlyle wrote “The death penalty has become a source of error and bias. It is time to end ‘tinkering with the machinery of death’ and declare it unconstitutional once and for all.”

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster urged the Supreme Court to reject Zink’s appeal in a brief he filed Tuesday morning. He stated in the brief that “If Zink really believed the Glossip would impact the outcome of his case, he would have filed his motion two weeks ago when Glossip was decided.”




Interesting Legal Sites You May Like




Search Now

General Municipal Law Attorney with land use experience


Oakland office of our client seeks general municipal law attorney with experience advising public ag...

Apply Now

Mid-level Restructuring Attorney with bankruptcy experience


Washington, D.C. office of our client seeks mid-level restructuring attorney with 4-6 years of exper...

Apply Now

Senior Land Use Attorney with experience

USA-CA-San Francisco

San Francisco office of our client seeks senior land use attorney with 7+ years of experience. The c...

Apply Now

Employment, Labor and OSHA Attorney with 3-6 years of experience


Dallas office of our client seeks employment, labor and OSHA attorney with 3-6 years of experience. ...

Apply Now



USA-CA-San Francisco

As an in-house legal counsel at Wix’s legal department, you will play a significant role in de...

Apply now


USA-MO-Kansas City

Successful, expanding KC personal injury law firm seeks an attorney with 5+ years personal injury li...

Apply now

Civil & Business Litigation / Transactional Attorney


Law firm with primary emphasis in Business & Civil Litigation and transactional work, seeks confiden...

Apply now



Lang, Richert & Patch a Fresno area AV-rated law firm located in the highly desirable Fig Garden Fin...

Apply now

Most Popular


To Top