Ralph Menzies appears during his commutation hearing before the parole board at the Utah State Correctional Facility in Salt Lake City as he petitions to stop his execution by firing squad on Friday, Aug. 15, 2025. (Pool photo by Bethany Baker/The Salt Lake Tribune)
In what is being described as the “last big hurdle” before his Sept. 5 execution, attorneys for death row inmate Ralph Menzies argued before the Utah Supreme Court that the state should pause proceedings and give the 67-year-old convicted killer with dementia another review to see if he is competent.
Menzies — sentenced to die by firing squad for the 1986 kidnapping and murder of 26-year-old Maurine Hunsaker — is running out of appeals. His death warrant has been signed, the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole recently denied him clemency and his execution is now almost two weeks away.
But the state’s high court could still force the Utah Department of Corrections to pause proceedings and grant Menzies another evaluation to determine whether he’s competent.
During a hearing on Thursday, Menzies’ attorneys made what could be their last case for sparing his life, while the Utah Attorney General’s Office argued they haven’t met the requirements for granting Menzies another competency review.
For much of the last year, Menzies’ attorneys have claimed his dementia makes him incompetent to be executed — per state and federal law, an inmate must understand the state’s reasoning for pursuing the death penalty. In June, 3rd District Court Judge Matthew Bates ruled that Menzies, despite having dementia, is competent.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
His attorneys then submitted a petition for another competency evaluation, claiming that Menzies’ mental condition had deteriorated, fueled by a hypoxic event, which is when the brain doesn’t get enough oxygen. For someone with dementia, like Menzies, his attorneys say a hypoxic event can worsen the symptoms.
Bates denied the petition, writing there wasn’t enough compelling evidence to grant Menzies another review. On Thursday, Menzies’ attorneys said Bates’ ruling was wrong, and that because of the pending appeal, the court should pause proceedings.
Central to their arguments was the legal principle “prima facie,” which essentially means there is enough evidence before the court for a case to move forward. During the roughly two-hour hearing, Lindsey Layer, one of Menzies’ attorneys, said they’ve shown through expert evaluations that there is ample evidence to suggest Menzies meets the threshold outlined in state code to grant him another review.
“He was unable to answer what he was charged with. That is new,” Layer said, referring to recent evaluations where experts asked Menzies if he understood the state’s reason for executing him. “He repeated the same thing, over and over again.”
And, the nature of dementia means Menzies’ cognitive abilities will continue to decline.
“He is only getting worse. That is the only trajectory of his illness, to get worse over time until it is ultimately fatal,” she said.
Attorneys for the state, however, told the supreme court justices that there isn’t enough evidence to grant another competency evaluation. State code sets a high bar, requiring allegations of a substantial change in circumstances — and those allegations “must raise a significant question” about the inmate’s competency.
Daniel Boyer with the Utah Attorney General’s Office argued Menzies’ attorneys have not satisfied those requirements.
“There needs to be a greater level of specificity” to Menzies’ claims, Boyer said, adding that some of the allegations of decline happened before Bates made his initial ruling in June — before the request for another evaluation.
“Here, the alleged events that demonstrated a significant decline occurred months before we even had oral arguments on the first petition,” Boyer said.
The five members of the Utah Supreme Court — which on Thursday included 2nd District Judge Ronald Russel sitting in place of Justice John Pearce, who was recused — pressed attorneys on both sides during the hearing.
The court took the matter under advisement. It’s unclear when they will rule, although prior rulings have been issued roughly a week after arguments.
Matt Hunsaker, Maurine’s son who has been a spokesperson for the family, told reporters after the hearing that this is the “last big hurdle” in the decadeslong case.
“If he’s not executed on Sept. 5, they’re not going to execute him,” said Hunsaker. “I’ll give up.”
Comments