. See Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 2514 (4th ed.1976) (defining "unusual” as: "being out of the ordinary ... deviating from the normal .... being unlike others”). 23 . See infra p. 87 for a comparative analysis of the use of electrocution in other states and nations. 24 . See generally Sech, supra note 18. 25 . Denno is author of an exhaustive study of execution by electrocution. See Deborah W. Denno, Is Electrocution an Unconstitutional Method of Execution? The Engineering of Death Over the Century 35 Wm. & Mary L.Rev. 551 (1994). 26 . See Denno Aff., Petitioner’s Appendix, § 7; Dieter Decl., Petitioner's Appendix, § 8; "Statutory Evidence of Legislative Changes in Execution Methods,” Petitioner's Appendix, § 17. 27 . Compare Fierro v. Gomez, 77 F.3d 301 (9th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); with Campbell v. Wood, 18 F.3d 662 (9th
holding californias sole method of execution lethal gas unconstitutional under the federal cruel and unusual provision holding that execution by lethal gas is not cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by either 8th and 14th amendments to united states constitution or article 2  15 of the arizona constitution holding that defendants claim that execution by electrocution or lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment is meritless holding execution of the mentally retarded constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment holding that the carrying out of an execution after the first execution attempt had failed did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment