COLUMBIA, S.C. — A judge has ruled that a death row inmate who says most laws are unconstitutional is mentally competent and may be executed for the 2003 killings of two police officers, clearing the way for the state to proceed while defense lawyers consider an appeal.
Richland County Judge R. Scott Sprouse wrote in a ruling dated late last week that Steven Bixby’s stated beliefs about the legal system and his willingness to defend property to the death are not proof he is mentally incompetent and should not block his execution. The decision followed a competency hearing at which both the defense and the state presented expert testimony.
Sprouse said the record shows Bixby cooperates with counsel and the psychiatrists who have evaluated him, and that he understands the role of his lawyers and the purpose of the competency proceeding. "While [Bixby] has often disagreed with counsel and expresses distrust regarding their strategy in this proceeding, the evidence demonstrates that he understands their role, the rationale for why they are engaging in this competency proceeding, and that he can choose whether or not to cooperate with them," the judge wrote.
Bixby, 58, was convicted in the December 2003 deaths of Abbeville County deputy Danny Wilson and state constable Donnie Ouzts. Prosecutors say Wilson was shot as he knocked on the front door of Bixby’s parents’ home after a dispute related to a road-widening project. Authorities said Wilson’s body was dragged inside and restrained with his own handcuffs, and that Ouzts was later killed when officers returned. The shootings triggered a 12-hour standoff during which authorities said the Bixbys and responding officers exchanged hundreds of rounds. Bixby’s parents were charged in the case and later died in custody.
The South Carolina Supreme Court had halted plans to schedule an execution and asked a lower court to determine whether Bixby’s legal beliefs prevented him from assisting in his own appeals. At the competency hearing, experts called by the defense testified that long-term isolation in prison had hardened Bixby’s convictions and left him stuck in a fixed mindset. An expert for the defense said those factors made him less able to engage meaningfully in his appeals.
State experts, several of whom have evaluated Bixby since shortly after the killings, testified that his fixed beliefs do not meet the legal standard for incompetence. Those evaluators told the court that although Bixby refuses to relinquish his views about the law and sees himself as prepared to die as a martyr if his appeals fail, he nonetheless understands the proceedings and can work with counsel.
A psychiatrist who treats death row inmates in South Carolina summarized Bixby’s view of his own mental state: "I’m not crazy. I’m not a mental health case. I may be an (expletive), but I’m not crazy," the psychiatrist recounted.
After the hearing, Bixby submitted a handwritten motion to the court reiterating his justification for the killings and accusing the judge of treason if he did not stop the execution. In the filing, Bixby wrote, "I am an innocent man!! Let freedom ring & let those committing treason swing!!!" and invoked Thomas Jefferson, saying he was "standing on principle even if I stand alone." The judge’s ruling noted such statements but found they did not establish legal incompetence.
Defense attorneys retain the right to ask higher courts to review Sprouse’s decision. The South Carolina Supreme Court previously intervened to order the lower-court examination; it may be the next forum for any appeal. State officials have not announced a new execution date.
Legal standards for competency to be executed generally require that a person understand the reason for the execution and the rationales for legal proceedings, not that the person hold constitutionally consistent beliefs. Courts have been increasingly called upon to apply those standards when defendants espouse extreme or idiosyncratic ideological views that raise questions about their capacity to participate in appeals.
The case has drawn attention within South Carolina because of its violent facts, the long interval since the offense, and the rare legal question of whether deeply held beliefs about government and law can amount to mental incompetence that bars execution. Advocates on both sides of death penalty debates have cited the case in wider discussions about the boundaries of mental competency and the administration of capital punishment.
Attorneys for Bixby did not immediately indicate whether they would file an immediate appeal of Sprouse’s ruling. The state has said it will proceed consistent with court orders and applicable appeals and stays.