This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/23/arizona-execution-supreme-court-appeal

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Arizona execution to go ahead after supreme court rejects inmate's appeal Arizona's top court stays execution after last-minute appeal
(about 1 hour later)
The US supreme court has denied a final, last-ditch appeal of an Arizona murderer seeking a reprieve from execution. Arizona's top court has temporarily halted a convicted murderer's execution as it considers last-minute appeal.
The decision came about an hour before Joseph Rudolph Wood was scheduled to be executed Wednesday in a 1989 double murder. The announcement came half an hour after Joseph Rudolph Wood, 55, was scheduled to be put to death at the state prison in Florence amid new scrutiny nationwide over lethal injections after several controversial executions.
The high court had put the execution back on track a day earlier in a separate matter involving the secrecy surrounding Arizona's lethal injection drugs. The Arizona supreme court could still allow the execution to move forward later Wednesday once it considers the arguments. The appeal before the state court focuses on arguments that Wood received inadequate legal representation at his sentencing, along with a challenge about the secrecy of the lethal injection drugs.
In that appeal, Wood's lawyers used a new legal tactic in which defense attorneys claim their clients' first amendment rights are being violated by the government's refusal to reveal details about lethal injection drugs. The US supreme court had earlier cleared the way for the state to carry out what would have been its third execution in the last year.
A federal appeals court ruled in Wood's favor before the US supreme court cleared the way for the execution. Wood's lawyers have used a new legal tactic in which defense attorneys claim their clients' First Amendment rights are being violated by the government's refusal to reveal details about lethal injection drugs. Wood's lawyers were seeking information about the two-drug combination that will be used to kill him, including the makers of the drugs.
A federal appeals court ruled in Wood's favor before the US supreme court put the execution back on track. The ninth US circuit court of appeals decision marked the first time an appeals court has acted to delay an execution based on the issue of drug secrecy, said Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington.
The ninth circuit gave new hope to death penalty opponents. While many death row inmates have made the same first amendment argument as Wood, the Supreme Court has not been receptive to the tactic. The court has ruled against them each time the transparency issue has come before the justices.
Wood was sentenced to death for killing Debra Dietz and her father, Eugene Dietz, in 1989 at the family's automotive shop in Tucson.
Wood and Dietz had a tumultuous relationship in which he periodically assaulted her. Dietz tried to end their relationship and got an order of protection against Wood.
On the day of the shooting, Wood went to the auto shop and waited for Dietz's father, who disapproved of his daughter's relationship with Wood, to get off the phone. Once the father hung up, Wood pulled out a revolver, shot him in the chest and then smiled.
Wood then turned his attention toward Debra Dietz, who was trying to telephone for help. Wood grabbed her by the neck and put his gun to her chest. She pleaded with him to spare her life. An employee heard Wood say, "I told you I was going to do it, I have to kill you." He then called her an expletive and fired two shots in her chest.