The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied a stay of execution for Kendrick Simpson, a death row inmate scheduled to be executed on February 12, 2026, in an order filed Tuesday. The three-judge panel rejected Simpson's federal appeal challenging Oklahoma's method of execution just eight days before his scheduled execution date.

Simpson was sentenced to death for a murder he committed in Oklahoma. According to the court filing, he had previously and unsuccessfully sought to challenge Oklahoma's method-of-execution statute in state court before bringing his case to federal court.

The case, *Simpson v. Quick*, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma under case number 5:25-CV-01221-D. Simpson named as defendants Christe Quick in her official capacity as Warden of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary, Justin Farris in his official capacity as interim Executive Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, and Gentner Drummond in his official capacity as Attorney General of Oklahoma.

The Tenth Circuit panel consisted of Chief Judge Jerome Holmes and Circuit Judges Carolyn McHugh and Allison Eid. The court determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of the appeal, ordering the case submitted without oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2) and Tenth Circuit Rule 34.1(G).

In their order, the judges noted that after examining the briefs and appellate record, they concluded that oral arguments were unnecessary. The ruling was issued as an "Order and Judgment" that the court specified is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. However, it may be cited for its persuasive value consistent with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and Tenth Circuit Rule 32.1.

Simpson's challenge appears to have focused on Oklahoma's method of execution, though the specific details of his constitutional claims were not elaborated in the available court documents. Method-of-execution challenges have become increasingly common in death penalty cases, with inmates arguing that certain execution protocols violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Oklahoma has faced scrutiny over its execution methods in recent years. The state resumed executions in 2021 after a moratorium that began in 2015 following a series of problematic executions. Oklahoma uses a three-drug lethal injection protocol that includes midazolam as a sedative, vecuronium bromide as a paralytic agent, and potassium chloride to stop the heart.

The timing of the Tenth Circuit's decision leaves Simpson with limited legal options. With his execution scheduled for February 12, 2026, he would need to seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court or pursue clemency from Oklahoma's governor to avoid execution.

Federal courts have generally been reluctant to grant last-minute stays of execution unless there are compelling constitutional issues or procedural errors. The Supreme Court has increasingly taken a restrictive view of death penalty appeals, particularly those filed close to scheduled execution dates.

Simpson's case represents part of ongoing litigation challenging various aspects of capital punishment procedures across the United States. While the Supreme Court has not declared the death penalty unconstitutional, it has required that execution methods not create a substantial risk of severe pain.

The Western District of Oklahoma, where Simpson initially filed his federal challenge, has jurisdiction over cases involving the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, where the state conducts its executions. The prison houses Oklahoma's death row and execution chamber.

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond's office, named as a defendant in the case, typically defends the state's execution protocols in federal court challenges. The Attorney General's office has consistently argued that Oklahoma's current lethal injection protocol is constitutional and humane.

The Oklahoma Department of Corrections, under interim Executive Director Justin Farris, oversees the implementation of death sentences in the state. Warden Christe Quick of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary would be responsible for carrying out Simpson's execution if it proceeds as scheduled.

With the Tenth Circuit's denial of a stay, attention now turns to whether Simpson will pursue further appeals or seek clemency. The narrow timeframe between the court's decision and the scheduled execution date limits the available options for Simpson's legal team.

The case highlights the compressed timeline that often characterizes death penalty litigation, where inmates may exhaust their appeals process only days or weeks before their scheduled executions. Federal courts must balance thorough review of constitutional claims against the finality that the legal system seeks to provide in capital cases.