Alabama Nitrogen Execution Case Settled/Dismissed

Following the nitrogen hypoxia execution of Kenneth Smith earlier this year, Alabama murderer Alan Miller sued the state to change its execution protocol, despite having sued previously to demand that the state use nitrogen. The case filed in March was Miller v. Marshall, 2:24-cv-00197-RAH (USDC MD Ala.) On Monday, Alabama AG Marshall issued a press release announcing the case had been settled. “The two sides had spent months in discovery, anticipating a major hearing on August 6, but after reviewing key documents and deposing the State’s witnesses, Miller agreed to settle with the State. The terms of the settlement remain confidential, but the result will be the dismissal of Miller’s lawsuit with prejudice.”

Due to the confidentiality of the settlement, the federal district court record on PACER contains only a stipulation of dismissal, not disclosing the terms, and a dismissal order.

I have not been able to find anything from the other side, but the fact that the case is settled with the execution date intact tends to confirm the AG’s claim that the settlement is a capitulation after the plaintiff’s attorneys found they had no case. The lack of any information on the anti-death-penalty Death Penalty Information Center also tends to corroborate this conclusion. The DPIC’s modus operandi is to carefully curate information on the death penalty, presenting only information that supports opponents and burying information that supports proponents.

The AG press release states:

In January, Alabama was the first state in the nation to use nitrogen gas as a method of execution when it successfully executed Kenneth Smith for the 1988 murder-for-hire slaying of Elizabeth Sennett. Although Miller sued in 2022 to ensure that his method of execution would be nitrogen hypoxia, he later asked a federal court to force the State to change its protocol once again. Miller’s speculative complaint relied on news reports, an unsworn statement by Kenneth Smith’s lawyer, and hyperbolic claims by Smith’s spiritual advisor that Smith appeared to be in discomfort during his execution. In its briefing, the State responded that Smith held his breath; much of the reporting wrongly attributed Smith’s early movements to nitrogen gas. As Smith’s own expert, Dr. Phillip Nitschke, explained: If Smith had “taken deep breaths …, he would, almost certainly, have lost consciousness and died much sooner” than he did. Other eyewitnesses, including Mrs. Sennett’s son, Mike Sennett, agreed that Smith seemed to be holding his breath. After dismissing most of his claims, the federal court allowed Miller to obtain discovery based a single claim that was “just barely” sufficient to proceed. Now, after the conclusion of that discovery, Miller has agreed to settle his case and to dismiss, with prejudice, all of his claims without so much as a hearing. Alabama will move forward to bring justice to Miller’s victims.

In the immediate aftermath of the Smith execution, press reports indicated conflicting statements by witnesses. As time went on, press reports tended to cite the one witness who supported the preferred narrative while ignoring the conflicting evidence.

The AG also notes the facts of Miller’s crime:

Miller has spent over two decades on death row for the “execution style” murders of Lee Holdbrooks, Scott Yancey, and Terry Lee Jarvis on August 5, 1999. Miller had worked with each of the victims before, and he claimed to believe that they had spread rumors about him. Miller shot Yancey once, paralyzing him, before shooting him twice more and causing his death. Miller shot Holdbrooks several times, and then as his victim crawled away, Miller approached and shot him in the head at point-blank range. Miller then drove to his former place of employment and shot Jarvis four times in the chest and once through the heart. The sentencing court called the murders “calculated, premeditated and callous, with utter disregard of human life” and noted that “the taking of these lives was among the worst in the memory of this Court and was well beyond the level” required for capital punishment.