## Facts

- Gary Mark Gilmore was convicted of murder in Utah state court and sentenced to death on October 7, 1976.
- Gilmore was advised by counsel and the trial court that he had substantial grounds for appeal, including unresolved constitutional questions about Utah’s death penalty statute, and that an appeal could be expedited.
- Gilmore repeatedly refused to appeal or seek any stay, stating he had received a fair trial, was well treated, did not claim innocence, and objected only to delay in carrying out the sentence.
- With an execution date set for December 6, 1976, Gilmore’s mother, Bessie Gilmore, filed an application in the U.S. Supreme Court on December 2, 1976, seeking a stay as “next friend” on his behalf.
- The Supreme Court granted a temporary stay on December 3, 1976, pending Utah’s response and receipt of specified state-court and Board of Pardons materials.
- Utah submitted its response and transcripts on December 7, 1976.
- On December 8, 1976, Gilmore, through counsel, opposed his mother’s application and challenged her standing to proceed in his name.

## Issues

1. Whether Gilmore made a knowing and intelligent waiver of any and all federal rights he could have asserted after imposition of the death sentence.
2. Whether a third party may pursue a stay as “next friend” when the condemned prisoner is competent and affirmatively refuses further litigation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court, in a per curiam order, examined the submitted state materials and concluded Gilmore made a knowing and intelligent waiver of any and all federal rights he might have asserted.
- The Court found the state determinations that Gilmore was competent to waive those rights were firmly grounded.
- The Court terminated the temporary stay of execution previously entered on December 3, 1976.

## Legal Principles

- A competent capital defendant may knowingly and intelligently waive federal rights and forego further judicial review, including potential constitutional challenges to the death sentence.
- When a condemned prisoner is competent, fully informed of available remedies, and firmly opposed to litigation, third parties cannot obtain federal relief by asserting “next friend” status.
- Supreme Court stay relief may be denied or withdrawn when the record supports a competent waiver and the real party in interest refuses to pursue claims.

## Conclusion

The Court ended the stay after determining that Gilmore, though advised of viable appellate and constitutional claims, competently and knowingly waived all federal rights and opposed any further proceedings, which left no basis for his mother to litigate on his behalf as “next friend.”


Gilmore v. Utah, 429 U.S. 1012 (1976)