Alabama Governor Commutes Death Sentence of Inmate Whose Accomplice Fired Fatal Shot

75-year-old Charles 'Sonny' Burton's sentence reduced to life in prison without parole

Published on Mar. 10, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Alabama Governor Kay Ivey has commuted the death sentence of 75-year-old inmate Charles 'Sonny' Burton, who was set to be executed this week for the 1991 shooting death of Doug Battle during a robbery, even though Burton was not in the building when the victim was killed. Ivey reduced Burton's sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole, citing the 'disparate circumstances' where the shooter whose death sentence was later reduced to life imprisonment.

Why it matters

This decision highlights the complex issues surrounding the death penalty, particularly when there are differing levels of culpability among co-defendants. It also raises questions about the fairness of the justice system and whether executions should proceed when an accomplice receives a lesser sentence.

The details

Burton was sentenced to death for the 1991 shooting death of Doug Battle during a robbery, even though another man was the one who actually shot and killed Battle. The shooter's death sentence was later reduced on appeal to life imprisonment.

  • The incident occurred in 1991.
  • Burton was set to be executed this week.

The players

Kay Ivey

The Republican Governor of Alabama who commuted Burton's death sentence.

Charles 'Sonny' Burton

A 75-year-old inmate whose death sentence was commuted by Governor Ivey.

Doug Battle

The victim who was shot and killed during the 1991 robbery.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I cannot proceed in good conscience with the execution of Mr. Burton under such disparate circumstances. I believe it would be unjust for one participant in this crime to be executed while the participant who pulled the trigger was not.”

— Kay Ivey, Governor of Alabama (Associated Press)

The takeaway

This case highlights the complexities and inconsistencies that can arise in the application of the death penalty, particularly when there are differing levels of culpability among co-defendants. It underscores the need for a thorough review of such cases to ensure fairness and proportionality in sentencing.