Opinion ID: 2198002
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Eighth Amendment Argument

Text: Sykes argues for the first time on appeal that his death sentence should be commuted because death by lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the United States and Delaware Constitutions. [5] He seeks a remand to the Superior Court for an evidentiary hearing to determine the impact Delaware's method of lethal injection may have on a defendant. This Court will not consider any question not fairly presented to the Superior Court unless the interests of justice so require. [6] Section 4209(f) of the Delaware Criminal Code prescribes the method of carrying out a death sentence in Delaware. [7] We have previously upheld the constitutionality of lethal injection as a form of execution. [8] Further, it is presumed that the Department of Correction will properly perform its duties in carrying out an execution procedure. [9] The United States Supreme Court has recently granted certiorari and heard argument to determine whether the combination three drug protocol used in executions by lethal injection violates the Eighth Amendment's proscription of cruel and unusual punishment. [10] However, Sykes did not present this issue to the trial judge. The United States Supreme Court has this issue under consideration. Their decision may control the issue irrespective of anything we might say about the Eighth Amendment today. Further, Sykes may seek post conviction relief after this mandate returns to the Superior Court on any claim under the Delaware Constitution about the propriety of the lethal injection procedure in Delaware. Accordingly, because Sykes still has several avenues available to protect his Eight Amendment and his Delaware constitutional rights, and because he did not properly raise Eight Amendment issues before the trial judge in the first instance, we decline to address those issues in this Opinion.