Tennessee executes Anthony Hines amid scrutiny of lethal-injection procedures

Tennessee executed Anthony Darrell Hines by lethal injection on Thursday, August 13, 2026, at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville, three months after the state halted another lethal-injection attempt because medical personnel could not establish a required backup IV line.

The Tennessee Supreme Court denied Hines’ requested intervention before the execution. His attorneys argued that his health conditions, the problems during Tony Carruthers’ May 21 execution attempt and the state’s handling of the physician involved created a risk of severe pain or another procedural failure.

Hines’ execution is complete. The broader questions about Tennessee’s lethal-injection process—including what the state will disclose or review after the Carruthers failure—remain unresolved.

What happened in Hines’ case

Hines, 66, was executed for the 1985 stabbing death of Catherine Jean Jenkins, a 54-year-old motel maid in Kingston Springs. He was sentenced to death in 1986 and was sentenced to death again after a later sentencing proceeding, according to Associated Press reporting.

The Tennessee Supreme Court previously set August 13, 2026, as Hines’ execution date. In the days before the execution, Hines’ attorneys sought court intervention and argued that Tennessee’s lethal-injection procedures posed an unacceptable risk in his case. The court rejected the requested relief, allowing the execution to proceed.

AP reported that the state declined to say whether the physician involved in the Carruthers procedure would participate in Hines’ execution. The available record does not establish that the same physician conducted Hines’ execution.

Why the Carruthers attempt mattered

On May 21, 2026, Tennessee halted its attempted lethal injection of Tony Carruthers after medical personnel spent more than an hour trying to establish a required backup IV line.

The Tennessee Department of Correction said medical personnel quickly established a primary IV line but could not find a suitable vein for the backup line required under the state’s execution protocol. Efforts to insert a central line also failed, and officials called off the attempt. Gov. Bill Lee then granted Carruthers a one-year reprieve, meaning the state would not try again for at least a year.

The procedure was not completed and should not be described as an execution. It became central to Hines’ legal challenge because his attorneys argued that the problems showed Tennessee could expose him to similar pain or encounter another procedural failure.

What Hines’ attorneys argued

Hines’ lawyers pointed to his medical history, including strokes that left him partially paralyzed, and argued that his condition could make IV access more difficult. They also questioned the qualifications of the physician who oversaw the Carruthers procedure and argued that the physician could create a similar risk in Hines’ case.

Those were arguments by Hines’ attorneys, not judicial findings that the physician was unqualified or that Tennessee’s lethal-injection protocol was unconstitutional. AP reported that the Tennessee Supreme Court found Hines had not established a basis for the requested intervention.

Separate oversight questions continue

On July 28, 2026, the Tennessee Supreme Court appointed a special master in a separate challenge involving death-row prisoner Christa Pike. WPLN reported that Pike’s attorneys raised concerns about execution conditions, including her planned transfer to the male Riverbend facility, gender-related housing and medical issues connected to her history of trauma.

The special-master proceeding was not opened specifically because of the Carruthers failure or Hines’ execution. It is a separate case, but it adds to the legal scrutiny surrounding Tennessee’s execution system. WPLN reported that Pike’s execution is scheduled for September 30, 2026.

What happens next

The available records do not establish a final state review, protocol change or independent finding about Hines’ execution. Tennessee officials and courts still face questions about what information will be disclosed, whether the Carruthers failure will receive a broader procedural review and how pending litigation may affect future executions.

For Tennesseans, the practical accountability question is whether the state will publicly document and evaluate its execution procedures after the Carruthers attempt and Hines’ completed execution. The courts decided Hines’ request for relief before August 13. They did not resolve every question about oversight, disclosure or future changes to the process.

Sources

• AP report on Anthony Hines’ execution
• Tennessee Supreme Court order setting Hines’ execution
• WPLN report on the Tennessee Supreme Court special master

Look for updates to this story

Related News

• New York’s medical aid-in-dying law is now in effect. What patients, families and providers should know
• What the federal court ruling on New Hampshire’s proof-of-citizenship voting law means before the Sept. 8 primary
• FrontRunner 2X advances toward a $1.3 billion federal grant. What Utah riders could gain
• Texas agencies prepare 3% baseline-request reductions for 2028-29 budget