US Supreme Court again refuses to allow Alabama to execute an inmate

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case of an Alabama man whose capital murder conviction was previously overturned by a state appeals court. The development marks yet another legal setback for the state in its pursuit of death penalty cases.

The Case History

Michael Anthony Powell was convicted in connection to the 2016 fatal shooting of Tracy Latty Algar, a store clerk in Alabaster. Algar was discovered in the store's restroom, having suffered a gunshot wound to the back of the head during a Sunday morning robbery.

Powell was sentenced to death in 2021 following an 11-1 jury recommendation. However, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals reversed that verdict in May 2024. In a 3-2 decision, the appeals court ruled that a prosecutor’s closing argument unfairly commented on Powell’s failure to testify, violating his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Supreme Court Intervention

While Alabama requested that the U.S. Supreme Court reverse the lower court's decision, the justices declined to intervene. Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, issued a dissenting opinion. Alito argued that the state was correct in its position that the defendant’s constitutional rights were not violated, noting that he would have ruled in favor of the state based on the 1988 precedent set in United States vs. Robinson.

This ruling represents the third instance in the last month where the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a defendant in an Alabama death penalty case. On Friday, the justices refused to lift a lower court's ban on the execution of Jeffery Lee by nitrogen gas. Additionally, in May, the court declined to intervene in the case of Joseph Smith, who federal judges ruled was intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for capital punishment.

Context of the Prosecution

According to documentation included in Alito’s dissent, the state initially linked Powell to the murder through eyewitness testimony and security footage. While the murder weapon remained missing, investigators located ammunition at the home of Powell’s girlfriend that matched a shell casing recovered at the scene.

The trial also involved a bizarre attempt at exoneration. While incarcerated, Powell allegedly hired a fellow inmate, David Jackson, to pen a confession letter. Powell reportedly signed Jackson’s name to the document, which was intended to clear Powell but accidentally included details regarding the location of the weapon.

During trial, when Powell’s defense highlighted the lack of a recovered weapon, the prosecutor remarked: “There is only one person in this room who knows where the gun is. One person, he is sitting over there. That guy knows where the gun is.” While the trial judge initially overruled the defense’s objection to these comments, the appeals court ultimately determined the statement was an impermissible commentary on the defendant’s silence.