Question: How many people were killed in the largest mass execution in US history?

Answer: 38

<hl> The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. <hl> They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of <hl> 38 <hl> American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

question: How many people were killed in the largest mass execution in US history?, context: The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.


Question: On what date did the largest mass execution in American history take place?

Answer: December 26, 1862

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. <hl> They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862 , in Mankato, Minnesota. <hl> A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on <hl> December 26, 1862 <hl>, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

They were executed simultaneously on <hl> December 26, 1862 <hl> , in Mankato, Minnesota.

question: On what date did the largest mass execution in American history take place?, context: The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.


Question: In what state did the largest American mass execution occur?

Answer: Minnesota

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. <hl> They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota . <hl> A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, <hl> Minnesota <hl>. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, <hl> Minnesota <hl> .

question: In what state did the largest American mass execution occur?, context: The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.


Question: What was the ethnicity of the people executed in the second-largest mass execution in US history?

Answer: African-American

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. <hl> The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. <hl> The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 <hl> African-American <hl> soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

question: What was the ethnicity of the people executed in the second-largest mass execution in US history?, context: The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.


Question: In what year did the Admiralty Court hang 26 pirates in Newport, Rhode Island?

Answer: 1723

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. <hl> The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723 , when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court. <hl>

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in <hl> 1723 <hl>, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in <hl> 1723 <hl> , when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.

question: In what year did the Admiralty Court hang 26 pirates in Newport, Rhode Island?, context: The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 American Indians convicted of murder and rape during the Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.


Question: What act restricted the scope of federal habeas corpus?

Answer: the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). <hl> The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 , which restricted significantly its previous scope. <hl> The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by <hl> the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 <hl>, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by <hl> the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 <hl> , which restricted significantly its previous scope.

question: What act restricted the scope of federal habeas corpus?, context: After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.


Question: How may state prisoners seek to have a death sentence overturned in federal court?

Answer: Federal habeas corpus

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. <hl> Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). <hl> The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. <hl> Federal habeas corpus <hl> is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

question: How may state prisoners seek to have a death sentence overturned in federal court?, context: After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.


Question: In what courts can federal habeas corpus suits be brought?

Answer: federal

<hl> After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. <hl> Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for <hl> federal <hl> habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.

question: In what courts can federal habeas corpus suits be brought?, context: After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.


Question: If prisoners use federal habeas corpus to present evidence that they're innocent, what must the evidence be?

Answer: truly compelling

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. <hl> Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling . <hl>

After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be <hl> truly compelling <hl>.

Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be <hl> truly compelling <hl> .

question: If prisoners use federal habeas corpus to present evidence that they're innocent, what must the evidence be?, context: After a death sentence is affirmed in state collateral review, the prisoner may file for federal habeas corpus, which is a unique type of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts. Federal habeas corpus is a species of collateral review, and it is the only way that state prisoners may attack a death sentence in federal court (other than petitions for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court after both direct review and state collateral review). The scope of federal habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricted significantly its previous scope. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts, through the process of direct review and state collateral review, have done at least a reasonable job in protecting the prisoner's federal constitutional rights. Prisoners may also use federal habeas corpus suits to bring forth new evidence that they are innocent of the crime, though to be a valid defense at this late stage in the process, evidence of innocence must be truly compelling.


Question: Along with New Jersey, what state commuted all life sentences when bills to repeal the death penalty were passed?

Answer: Illinois

<hl> In New Jersey and Illinois , all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. <hl> In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and <hl> Illinois <hl>, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and <hl> Illinois <hl> , all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law.

question: Along with New Jersey, what state commuted all life sentences when bills to repeal the death penalty were passed?, context: In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.


Question: The governor of what state commuted four death sentences in January 2015?

Answer: Maryland

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. <hl> In Maryland , Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. <hl> While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In <hl> Maryland <hl>, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In <hl> Maryland <hl> , Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015.

question: The governor of what state commuted four death sentences in January 2015?, context: In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.


Question: Who was governor of Maryland in January 2015?

Answer: Martin O'Malley

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. <hl> In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. <hl> While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor <hl> Martin O'Malley <hl> commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

question: Who was governor of Maryland in January 2015?, context: In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.


Question: In what state's supreme court was State v. Santiago decided?

Answer: Connecticut

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. <hl> While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. <hl> New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in <hl> Connecticut <hl> was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

question: In what state's supreme court was State v. Santiago decided?, context: In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.


Question: How many people had their sentences commuted by State v. Santiago?

Answer: 11

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. <hl> While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. <hl> New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the <hl> 11 <hl> men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.

question: How many people had their sentences commuted by State v. Santiago?, context: In New Jersey and Illinois, all death row inmates had their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole when the death penalty repeal bills were signed into law. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley commuted the state's four remaining death sentences to life in prison without parole in January 2015. While the bill repealing capital punishment in Connecticut was not retroactive, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in State v. Santiago that the legislature's decision to prospectively abolish capital punishment rendered it an offense to "evolving standards of decency," thus commuting the sentences of the 11 men remaining on death row to life in prison without parole. New Mexico may yet execute two condemned inmates sentenced prior to abolition, and Nebraska has ten death row inmates who may still be executed despite abolition.


Question: In what court was Bigby v. Dretke decided?

Answer: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

<hl> The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. <hl> This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the <hl> United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit <hl> in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

question: In what court was Bigby v. Dretke decided?, context: The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.


Question: What court heard the case Penry v. Lynaugh?

Answer: United States Supreme Court

<hl> The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. <hl> This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

The <hl> United States Supreme Court <hl> in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

question: What court heard the case Penry v. Lynaugh?, context: The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.


Question: What amendment to the Constitution did Penry v. Lynaugh address?

Answer: Eighth

<hl> The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. <hl> This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's <hl> Eighth <hl> Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

question: What amendment to the Constitution did Penry v. Lynaugh address?, context: The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.


Question: What sentencing factors did Bigby v. Dretke consider?

Answer: mitigating

<hl> The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. <hl> This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about <hl> mitigating <hl> factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.

question: What sentencing factors did Bigby v. Dretke consider?, context: The United States Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Bigby v. Dretke have been clear in their decisions that jury instructions in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factors regarding the defendant's mental health violate the defendant's Eighth Amendment rights, saying that the jury is to be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that specific explanations to the jury are necessary to weigh mitigating factors.


Question: In what year was Tony Chebatoris killed?

Answer: 1938

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. <hl> (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938 .) <hl> Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in <hl> 1938 <hl>.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

(However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in <hl> 1938 <hl> .)

question: In what year was Tony Chebatoris killed?, context: Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.


Question: When was Michigan's fourth Constitution ratified?

Answer: 1963

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) <hl> Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963 ; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. <hl> Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in <hl> 1963 <hl>; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in <hl> 1963 <hl> ; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death.

question: When was Michigan's fourth Constitution ratified?, context: Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.


Question: In what city was Tony Chebatoris executed?

Answer: Milan

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. <hl> (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan , Michigan in 1938.) <hl> Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in <hl> Milan <hl>, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

(However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in <hl> Milan <hl> , Michigan in 1938.)

question: In what city was Tony Chebatoris executed?, context: Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.


Question: In what year was there a failed Michigan constitutional amendment to allow the death penalty?

Answer: 2004

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. <hl> In 2004 , a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures. <hl>

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In <hl> 2004 <hl>, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

In <hl> 2004 <hl> , a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

question: In what year was there a failed Michigan constitutional amendment to allow the death penalty?, context: Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.


Question: What article of the fourth Michigan Constitution forbids laws allowing capital punishment?

Answer: 4

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) <hl> Article 4 , Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. <hl> Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article <hl> 4 <hl>, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.

Article <hl> 4 <hl> , Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death.

question: What article of the fourth Michigan Constitution forbids laws allowing capital punishment?, context: Several states have never had capital punishment, the first being Michigan, which abolished it shortly after entering the Union. (However, the United States government executed Tony Chebatoris at the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan in 1938.) Article 4, Section 46 of Michigan's fourth Constitution (ratified in 1963; effective in 1964) prohibits any law providing for the penalty of death. Attempts to change the provision have failed. In 2004, a constitutional amendment proposed to allow capital punishment in some circumstances failed to make it on the November ballot after a resolution failed in the legislature and a public initiative failed to gather enough signatures.


Question: Under what federal statute are offenses punished by lethal injection?

Answer: Drug Kingpin Act of 1988

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. <hl> For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988 , the method of execution is lethal injection. <hl> The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the <hl> Drug Kingpin Act of 1988 <hl>, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

For offenses under the <hl> Drug Kingpin Act of 1988 <hl> , the method of execution is lethal injection.

question: Under what federal statute are offenses punished by lethal injection?, context: The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.


Question: According to what law are federal prisoners executed according to the procedures in place in the state in which they were convicted?

Answer: Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994

<hl> The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. <hl> If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the <hl> Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 <hl> is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

question: According to what law are federal prisoners executed according to the procedures in place in the state in which they were convicted?, context: The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.


Question: In what month and year was Juan Garza executed?

Answer: June 2001

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. <hl> Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001 , and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003. <hl>

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in <hl> June 2001 <hl>, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in <hl> June 2001 <hl> , and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

question: In what month and year was Juan Garza executed?, context: The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.


Question: Who was executed by the federal government on March 18, 2003?

Answer: Louis Jones, Jr.

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. <hl> Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003. <hl>

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and <hl> Louis Jones, Jr. <hl> was put to death on March 18, 2003.

question: Who was executed by the federal government on March 18, 2003?, context: The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.


Question: In what state is the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute?

Answer: Indiana

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. <hl> The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. <hl> The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, <hl> Indiana <hl> is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.

question: In what state is the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute?, context: The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution. For offenses under the Drug Kingpin Act of 1988, the method of execution is lethal injection. The Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana is currently the home of the only death chamber for federal death penalty recipients in the United States, where inmates are put to death by lethal injection. The complex has so far been the only location used for federal executions post-Gregg. Timothy McVeigh and Juan Garza were put to death in June 2001, and Louis Jones, Jr. was put to death on March 18, 2003.


Question: In what year did the American Law Institute create a death penalty framework for the Model Penal Code?

Answer: 1962

<hl> In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962 , as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." <hl> A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.

In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in <hl> 1962 <hl>, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.

In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in <hl> 1962 <hl> , as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment."

question: In what year did the American Law Institute create a death penalty framework for the Model Penal Code?, context: In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.


Question: In what year did the American Law Institute change their mind about their contribution on the death penalty to the Model Penal Code?

Answer: 2009

<hl> In October 2009 , the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." <hl> A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.

In October <hl> 2009 <hl>, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.

In October <hl> 2009 <hl> , the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment."

question: In what year did the American Law Institute change their mind about their contribution on the death penalty to the Model Penal Code?, context: In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.


Question: What goal did the ALI's study say could not be reconciled with the goal of individualized execution decisions?

Answer: systemic fairness for minorities

In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." <hl> A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled. <hl>

In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of <hl> systemic fairness for minorities <hl> and others could not be reconciled.

question: What goal did the ALI's study say could not be reconciled with the goal of individualized execution decisions?, context: In October 2009, the American Law Institute voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had created in 1962, as part of the Model Penal Code, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled.


Question: In what year was Coker v. Georgia decided?

Answer: 1977

<hl> In 1977 , the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. <hl> Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In <hl> 1977 <hl>, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In <hl> 1977 <hl> , the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder.

question: In what year was Coker v. Georgia decided?, context: In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.


Question: For what offense did Coker v. Georgia forbid the death penalty?

Answer: rape of an adult woman

<hl> In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman , and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. <hl> Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for <hl> rape of an adult woman <hl>, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for <hl> rape of an adult woman <hl> , and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder.

question: For what offense did Coker v. Georgia forbid the death penalty?, context: In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.


Question: Along with Georgia, what American jurisdiction allowed people to be executed for the rape of an adult prior to Coker?

Answer: U.S. Federal government

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. <hl> Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. <hl> However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the <hl> U.S. Federal government <hl> were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

question: Along with Georgia, what American jurisdiction allowed people to be executed for the rape of an adult prior to Coker?, context: In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.


Question: What ruling forbid the government from executing child rapists?

Answer: Kennedy v. Louisiana

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. <hl> In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. <hl> The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the <hl> Kennedy v. Louisiana <hl> decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.

question: What ruling forbid the government from executing child rapists?, context: In 1977, the Supreme Court's Coker v. Georgia decision barred the death penalty for rape of an adult woman, and implied that the death penalty was inappropriate for any offense against another person other than murder. Prior to the decision, the death penalty for rape of an adult had been gradually phased out in the United States, and at the time of the decision, the State of Georgia and the U.S. Federal government were the only two jurisdictions to still retain the death penalty for that offense. However, three states maintained the death penalty for child rape, as the Coker decision only imposed a ban on executions for the rape of an adult woman. In 2008, the Kennedy v. Louisiana decision barred the death penalty for child rape. The result of these two decisions means that the death penalty in the United States is largely restricted to cases where the defendant took the life of another human being. The current federal kidnapping statute, however, may be exempt because the death penalty applies if the victim dies in the perpetrator's custody, not necessarily by his hand, thus stipulating a resulting death, which was the wording of the objection. In addition, the Federal government retains the death penalty for non-murder offenses that are considered crimes against the state, including treason, espionage, and crimes under military jurisdiction.