Tyler Robinson, 22, who has been charged in the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk during a debate at Utah Valley University, could face execution by firing squad if convicted and sentenced to death under Utah law, legal experts say. Utah is one of five states that still authorize the method and one of only two to use it since the national moratorium on capital punishment ended in 1977.
The firing squad was last used in Utah in 2010, when convicted murderer Ronnie Lee Gardner was executed. The method used in that case — and outlined in state statute and subsequent practice — involves seating the condemned in a wooden chair set before sandbags, placing a small paper target over the heart and assembling five volunteer marksmen roughly 25 feet away. Four of the marksmen are issued live rounds in .30-caliber Winchester rifles and one is given a dummy round so that none knows for certain who fired the fatal shot.
Utah lawmakers have adjusted the state's policies on execution methods over time. In 2004 the state stopped offering inmates the choice of a firing squad, citing the intense media attention the method drew. In 2015, then-Gov. Gary Herbert signed a law restoring the firing squad as a backup option if lethal injection drugs were unavailable. Supporters of the backup argued the state needed an alternative because pharmaceutical suppliers were increasingly refusing to provide drugs for executions.
Since the moratorium era, only Utah and South Carolina have carried out executions by firing squad. South Carolina used the method in March to execute a convicted double murderer. Utah's most recent execution under the practice was witnessed by a small group of journalists and officials; reports from that event described a brief series of shots, a hood placed over the inmate's head and visible muscular movement after the volley.
Legal and medical considerations have complicated the route from indictment to execution in Utah. The state does not regularly impose death sentences, and capital cases typically proceed through lengthy trials and appeals that can delay an execution for decades. Defense attorneys in recent years have successfully argued against executions on grounds of severe cognitive decline or dementia, as in the case of Ralph Leroy Menzies, 67, whose scheduled firing squad execution was stayed after his lawyers said he had been reduced to using a wheelchair, required oxygen and was unable to understand why he was being executed.
Prosecutors say Robinson opened fire on Sept. 10 during a campus event, killing 31-year-old Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA. Robinson made his first court appearance on Tuesday and did not enter a plea. Authorities have charged him with aggravated murder as well as counts that include felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering and committing a violent offense in the presence of children.
Whether the state will seek the death penalty in Robinson's case is uncertain at this stage. Utah law sets out aggravating factors that can support a capital sentence; defense attorneys and legal experts note that the presence of multiple victims, vulnerability of victims, or particularly cruel conduct are commonly cited aggravators. Clayton Simms, a Utah criminal defense attorney, told a local television station that while Robinson's case "isn't a traditional death penalty case" involving multiple deaths or torture, prosecutors could seek capital punishment if they argue the killing of a public figure in front of thousands of witnesses meets the statutory standard for particular cruelty.
The constitutional and procedural safeguards that apply in capital cases mean that even when prosecutors pursue a death sentence, the path to execution can be prolonged. Appeals, mental competency evaluations and federal review can extend litigation for many years. That has been the experience of past death-row inmates in Utah and elsewhere.
Some practical differences distinguish execution by firing squad from lethal injection. Medical experts and state officials have noted that organs from inmates executed by firing squad may be suitable for donation in cases where lethal injection would render organs nonviable. The 2015 legislative change reinstating the firing squad as a backup came amid broader national debates over the availability and ethics of lethal injection drugs and methods.
Robinson remains in pretrial custody as the criminal process unfolds. If prosecutors decide to seek the death penalty, the case would trigger a separate sentencing phase in which jurors would consider the aggravating and mitigating circumstances laid out under Utah law. Even with a capital sentence, defense appeals and other legal challenges could delay any execution for years.
Opponents of the firing squad method and of capital punishment in general argue that the practice is inhumane and unnecessary; supporters point to its relative swiftness compared with some alternatives and to the need for a legally available method if lethal injection drugs cannot be obtained. In Utah, lawmakers and courts have balanced those concerns in recent decades through legislative changes and judicial review.
Any determination about Robinson's ultimate sentence will rest on prosecutorial decisions, jury findings and multiple layers of judicial review. For now, the availability of the firing squad in Utah's legal framework means that, should a death sentence be imposed and survive appeals, the method remains a constitutionally sanctioned option under state law.