Opinion ID: 204393
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Competence of Execution Team Members

Text: Dickens argues that past missteps in hiring and training raise an issue of fact as to whether Arizona will hire competent team members in the future. The evidence Dickens points to is Arizona's hiring of two unqualified MTMsDr. Alan Doerhoff and an individual known as MTM # 3and its failure to interview and screen a current member of the SOT and an MTM known as MTM # 1. Arizona hired Doerhoff to serve on the Medical Team for the Comer execution in May 2007. Doerhoff is a physician and licensed surgeon who lives in Missouri; he has assisted with executions in several states and for the federal government. At the time Arizona hired Doerhoff, he had testified in a case challenging Missouri's execution protocol that he is dyslexic, has problems with numbers, knowingly improvised the doses of lethal injection drugs, adhered to no set protocol, and kept no records of procedures. Following Doerhoff's testimony, Missouri publicly announced that it would no longer use him in executions. Arizona hired MTM #3 in February 2008. During discovery, Dickens learned that MTM #3 did not attend medical school, had his nursing license suspended, and did not have any other medical licenses. When he was hired for the Medical Team, MTM # 3 owned an appliance business. He has been treated for post-traumatic stress disorder from service in Iraq, and has been arrested multiple times. As one of the amendments to the November 1, 2007 protocol, Arizona agreed never to use Doerhoff or MTM # 3 in future executions. We do not question the challenges to Doerhoff and MTM # 3, nor do we reject the claim that a Medical Team made up of individuals like them could undermine the Protocol. At the time that Doerhoff and MTM # 3 were hired, however, there were neither formal experience and training requirements nor routine background and license checks on MTMs. These requirements are all amendments to the November 1, 2007 protocol that were adopted through the Joint Report. It is undisputed that neither Doerhoff nor MTM #3 would have been hired under the current Protocol. But the fact that Arizona hired unqualified MTMs before the Protocol was in place does not create an issue of fact as to whether Arizona will do the same when operating under the Protocol. [4] See Raby, 600 F.3d at 560 (evidence of past failure to follow protocol did not rise to the level of constitutional significance because the Execution Procedure mandates . . . that sufficient safeguards are in place to reduce the risk of pain below the level of constitutional significance); Jackson, 594 F.3d at 226 (evidence of failure to follow former procedures does not suggest the existence of conditions that are sure or very likely to cause serious illness and needless suffering) (internal citation and quotation omitted); Clemons, 585 F.3d at 1128 (The mere allegation Missouri employed [Doerhoff] in the past simply does not support the prisoners' allegations Missouri will employ `incompetent' and `unqualified' personnel in the future.). During discovery, Dickens also learned that Arizona failed to interview and screen MTM # 1 and a current member of the SOT. When MTM # 1 was hired in 2007, there were no interview or screening requirements for MTMs. Arizona was required to interview and screen the SOT member, and it failed to do so. One, isolated failure to follow a procedure does not create an objectively intolerable risk of harm, particularly where there is no evidence that the SOT member is unqualified for his job or that any problems have arisen from his participation on SOT. See Baze, 553 U.S. at 50, 128 S.Ct. 1520 ([A]n isolated mishap alone . . . while regrettable, does not suggest . . . a substantial risk of serious harm.) (internal quotation and citation omitted); Raby, 600 F.3d at 560 (possibility that warden had not screened execution team members did not raise issue of fact where no evidence that the team members lacked required qualifications). [5]