Supreme Court ruling paves the way for inmates' lawsuit

Prisoners are allowed to claim cruel and unusual punishment.
COLUMBUS (AP) -- A U.S. Supreme Court ruling making it easier for death row inmates to contest lethal injections will help two Ohio prisoners who claim in a lawsuit that the method constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, their attorney said Tuesday.
The court unanimously ruled Monday that condemned inmates are allowed to make special federal court claims that the chemicals used in executions are too painful -- and therefore amount to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.
Greg Meyers, chief counsel for the public defender's office, said the ruling backs up arguments he's made in a lawsuit on behalf of death row inmate Richard Cooey, sentenced to die for the rape and murder of two University of Akron students in 1986.
"It means we've been right all along," said Meyers, whose 2004 federal civil rights lawsuit has since been joined by inmate Jeffrey Hill. The case is pending in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.
A message seeking comment was left Tuesday with the Ohio attorney general's office. The state has argued that the use of lethal injections has passed legal tests.
Ohio's method of lethal injection came under national scrutiny because of problems with the execution of Joseph Clark on May 2. The execution team had trouble finding a suitable vein in the arms of Clark, a former intravenous drug user, and the vein they chose collapsed as the chemicals started flowing. At one point, Clark asked the team if they could give him something by mouth to kill him.