Por Renan Filho · 2026-10-08**Lead**
HUNTSVILLE, Texas — Texas carried out the execution of Jamaal Howard on Thursday evening at the state penitentiary in Huntsville, despite renewed scrutiny over the use of midazolam, a sedative that was implicated in a failed execution in Tennessee in 2025. Howard, 48, was pronounced dead at 6:47 p.m. CDT after receiving a single-dose lethal injection, according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. He had been convicted of capital murder in the 2009 shooting death of 33-year-old convenience store clerk Hasmukh Patel during a robbery in Dallas.
**Contexto**
Howard's execution had been scheduled for October 8, 2026, after a series of legal appeals were denied by both the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. His attorneys had filed a last-minute petition arguing that the use of midazolam—a benzodiazepine that does not produce surgical anesthesia—violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The petition cited the April 2025 execution of Edmund Zagorski in Tennessee, where witnesses reported that Zagorski gasped and moved for several minutes after the drug was administered, raising concerns that the protocol could cause severe pain and suffering.
Midazolam has been at the center of legal battles over lethal injection protocols since the botched 2014 execution of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma, who died of a heart attack 43 minutes after the procedure began. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of midazolam in Glossip v. Gross, ruling that prisoners had not proven a viable alternative method. However, subsequent executions in Alabama, Arizona, and Ohio have reported similar complications, leading several states to abandon the drug in favor of pentobarbital or nitrogen hypoxia.
Texas, which has executed more prisoners than any other state since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, continues to use a three-drug protocol that includes midazolam, vecuronium bromide, and potassium chloride. The state has maintained that the protocol is humane and effective, citing its use in over 100 executions since 2012. However, critics point to the lack of transparency in the state's drug sourcing, as compounding pharmacies are not required to disclose their identities, making it difficult to verify the quality and potency of the drugs used.
Howard's case also drew attention to racial and socioeconomic disparities in the application of the death penalty. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Black defendants make up a disproportionate share of those executed in Texas, and Howard's defense team argued that his trial was marred by ineffective counsel, including a lawyer who failed to present mitigating evidence about Howard's traumatic childhood and intellectual impairments. These claims were rejected by the courts, which found that Howard had received a fair trial and that the evidence of his guilt was overwhelming.
**Analise**
The execution of Jamaal Howard underscores a growing divide in the United States over the use of lethal injection as a method of capital punishment. While public support for the death penalty has declined in recent years—Gallup polls show support at its lowest level in five decades—Texas remains a steadfast proponent, carrying out more executions in 2026 than any other state. The controversy over midazolam, however, is unlikely to subside. The drug's pharmacological properties are well-documented: it is a sedative, not an anesthetic, and its effectiveness in rendering a prisoner unconscious before the administration of paralytic and lethal agents has been questioned by medical experts. The American Medical Association and the American Society of Anesthesiologists have both issued statements opposing the use of midazolam in executions, citing the risk of awareness and severe pain.
The failed Tennessee execution has added urgency to these concerns. Witnesses in that case reported that Zagorski appeared to be conscious and in distress for several minutes, leading to a temporary moratorium on executions in that state. Tennessee has since switched to a single-drug protocol using pentobarbital, but Texas has shown no indication of following suit. State officials argue that the current protocol is legally sound and that no execution in Texas has ever been botched, a claim that is technically true but does not account for the lack of independent medical monitoring during the procedure.
The broader implications of Howard's execution extend beyond the debate over drug protocols. It highlights the finality of the death penalty and the difficulty of ensuring that no innocent person is put to death. While Howard's guilt was not in question, the case has reignited discussions about the fairness of the judicial process, particularly for defendants with limited resources. As the United States moves toward a more cautious approach to capital punishment—with 23 states having abolished it and several others imposing moratoriums—Texas's continued reliance on midazolam may become an outlier that draws increasing legal and public scrutiny.
**Fontes**
This report is based on information from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, court records from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court docket, the Death Penalty Information Center, and witness accounts from the 2025 Tennessee execution of Edmund Zagorski, as reported by the Associated Press and local news outlets.