Legal Document

547 U.S. 573 (2006) HILL v. McDONOUGH, INTERIM SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al. No. 05-8794. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 26, 2006. Decided June 12, *575 D. Todd Doss, by appointment the Court, 1096, argued cause for petitioner. With him on briefs were John Abatecola, Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., and Ian Heath Gershengorn. Carolyn M. Snurkowski, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Florida, respondents. her brief was Charles J. Crist, General. Kannon K. Shanmugam States as amicus curiae urging affirmance. Solicitor Clement, Fisher, Garre, Robert Erickson.[*] *576 JUSTICE KENNEDY delivered opinion Court. Petitioner Clarence E. Hill challenges constitutionality a three-drug sequence State Florida likely would use to execute lethal injection. Seeking enjoin procedure, he filed this action in District Northern pursuant Civil Rights Act 1871, Rev. Stat. § 1979, amended, 42 C. 1983. The Appeals Eleventh Circuit construed petition writ habeas corpus ordered it dismissed noncompliance with requirements second successive petition. question before us is whether Hill's claim must be brought an under statute authorizing that writ, 28 2254, or may proceed relief This not first time we have found necessary discuss which two statutes governs prisoner alleging constitutional violation. See, e. g., Nelson Campbell, 541 637 (2004); Heck Humphrey, 512 477 (1994); Preiser Rodriguez, 411 475 (1973). suit, now determine, comparable its essentials allowed 1983 Nelson, supra. In accord precedent reverse. I year 1983, convicted first-degree murder sentenced death. When his conviction sentence became final some five years later, method execution then prescribed law electrocution. Fla. *577 922.10 (1987). On January 14, 2000four days after conclusion first, unsuccessful round federal litigationFlorida amended controlling provide: "A death shall executed injection, unless person affirmatively elects electrocution." 922.105(1) (2003). now-controlling statute, has been changed any relevant respect, does specify particular injection procedure. Implementation responsibility Department Corrections. See ibid.; Sims State, 754 So. 2d 657, 670 (Fla. 2000) (per curiam). department issued rules establishing specific protocol, implementing policies procedures appear exempt from Florida's Administrative Procedure Act. 922.105(7). After provide heard row inmate's procedure violated Eighth Amendment's prohibition cruel unusual punishments. Sims, complainant, who had acquired detailed information about contended planned injections great pain if drugs administered properly. 2d, at 666-668. rejected argument too speculative. Id., 668. November 29, 2005, Governor signed warrant, 24, requested but provided none. App. 21, n. 3 (Verified Complaint Declaratory & Injunctive Relief ¶ 15, (hereinafter Complaint)). challenged, time, State's December postconviction state court, relying upon Amendment. trial court denied request evidentiary *578 hearing procedurally barred. affirmed 17, 921 579, cert. denied, 546 1219 (2006). Three laterand four scheduled executionHill Assuming discussed length decision, see 20-21, (Complaint 3), alleged drug injected, sodium pentothal, sufficient anesthetic render painless administration third drugs, pancuronium bromide potassium chloride. There ensuing risk, alleged, could remain conscious suffer severe paralyzed lungs body chloride caused muscle cramping fatal heart attack. 18-21 ¶¶ 9-16). complaint sought injunction "barring defendants executing Plaintiff manner they currently intend." 22 19-20). functional equivalent corpus. 15 (relying Robinson Crosby, 358 F.3d 1281 (2004)). Because earlier action, deemed thus barred failure obtain leave file required 2244(b). day affirmed. It held deny application because 2244(b)(2) allow proceed. 437 1084, 1085 (CA11 2006). issuing temporary stay execution, granted certiorari continued pending our resolution case. 1158 *579 II "Federal opens main avenues complaints related imprisonment: corpus, Challenges validity confinement particulars affecting duration are province corpus." Muhammad Close, 540 749, 750 (2004) curiam) (citing Preiser, U. S., 500). An challenge circumstances confinement, however, U.S., 750. 637, addressed action. complainant severely compromised peripheral veins, Alabama apply invasive arm leg enable He violate observed general difficult one. easily described fact sentence; yet where legislature established "a seeking permanently amount itself." 644. did decide question. lawsuit issue, understood case, require itself. mandated law, inmate appeared willing concede existence acceptable alternative 645-646. Absent finding challenged concluded, injunctive prevent sentence. Consequently, *580 suit presented ibid. decision also holding congruent Court's precedents addressing civil rights suits damages implicate relief. Those cases prisoners' can proceeding when judgment prisoner's favor necessarily implies invalidity Heck, 487; supra, 751. analogous circumvent limits imposed statute. so granting imply unlawfulness 647. case conclude controlled Nelson. Here, successful matter seeks instead only respondents "from [Hill] 20). objection anticipated protocol allegedly causes foreseeable risk . gratuitous unnecessary" pain. 46 (Application Stay Execution Expedited Appeal). concedes "other methods choose constitutional," Brief do contend, least point litigation, without other practicable, legal moreover, corrections §§ 922.105(1), (7) (prescribing leaving implementation corrections). appears *581 free Under these grant seen barring One difference between present course, chemical rather than surgical preliminary medical operation separable "necessary prerequisite to, indispensable part of, procedure." 645. reasoned although venous access follow chosen means necessary; "the gravamen petitioner's entire claim" "gratuitous." Ibid. (emphasis deleted). same true here. Although chemicals obvious necessity alleges presents avoid while still being able enforce ordering concern foregoing analysis more theoretical real based practicalities A avoids harms alleges, instance, susceptible attack purported risks own. Respondents their supporting amici contend distinction actions account practical reality capital litigation tactics: Inmates intending forestall Nelson's emphasis something "necessary" provides no endpoint piecemeal aimed delaying execution. Viewed isolation, single component given strictly necessary, goes, litigant put off challenging one aspect another. aftermath cautionary example, *582 contending remand amend over Alabama's adopted alternativeone previously proposedcontinues day. Amici Curiae 7-14. different should considerations. contends litigant's if, 646, identifies alternative, authorized like fails so, maintains, imposition executionwhich say, itselfbecause shows unable unwilling alternatives "[e]xcept abstract." 14. agree courts tolerate abusive tactics, Part III, infra, even States' proposed limitation effective accept it. plaintiff's affirmative identification supported need 646 affidavits). That fact, decisive. change traditional pleading actions. If foreclose recharacterizing might proper. id., 644, 646. Cf. Gonzalez 545 524 (2005). Imposition heightened requirements, quite matter. Specific Federal Rules Procedure, not, rule, through case-by-case determinations courts. Fed. Civ. Proc. 8 9; Swierkiewicz Sorema N. A., 534 506, 512-514 (2002). *583 frame differently. While asking explicit terms overrule implicating direct 30-31; Alabama, 16-18. They rely that, successful, invalidation existing confinement. Edwards Balisok, 520 641 (1997); 477. cases, demonstrate test undermine "be applied functionally." 16. By logic, said, frustrate cannot squared observation criterionwhether bar executionis consistent Heck's Balisok's approach 646-647. those nature such invalidity" As above, stage said establish "unlawfulness [that] invalid." 486. Any incidental delay allowing cast kind negative implication III Filing entitle order staying *584 course. Both victims crime important interest timely enforcement Calderon Thompson, 523 538, 556 (1998). Our conclusions today diminish interest, nor deprive protect We again, equitable remedy. available right, equity sensitive strong enforcing criminal judgments undue interference 649-650. re Blodgett, 502 236, 239-240 (1992) curiam); Delo Stokes, 495 320, 323 (1990) (Kennedy, J., concurring). Thus, applicants, inmates plans them satisfy all stay, including showing significant possibility success merits. Barefoot Estelle, 463 880, 895-896 (1983). Mazurek Armstrong, 968, 972 (1997) (preliminary movant, clear showing, carries burden persuasion). considering presumption against consideration merits requiring entry stay." 650. Gomez Dist. Cal., 503 653, 654 (noting "last-minute application" applicant's "attempt manipulation" judicial process grounds denial stay). number invoked powers dismiss saw speculative late Hicks Taft, 431 916 (CA6 2005); White Johnson, 429 572 (CA5 Boyd Beck, 404 F. Supp. 879 (EDNC 2005). made *585 us, recognize problem address significant. Repetitive presumably raise similar concerns. dilatory suits, reject so. equities underlying us. reverse further proceedings opinion. ordered. NOTES [*] Briefs reversal New Jerseyans Alternatives Death Penalty Gibbons Lawrence S. Lustberg; Bradley A. MacLean Thomas Goldstein, Amy Howe, Kevin Russell, Pamela Karlan; Darick Demorris Walker David W. Ogden Hannah Ard. affirmance Troy King, Newsom, General, Attorneys respective follows: Terry Goddard Arizona, Mike Beebe Arkansas, Bill Lockyer California, Suthers Colorado, Carl Danberg Delaware, Thurbert Baker Georgia, G. Wasden Idaho, Steve Carter Indiana, Phill Kline Kansas, Gregory Stumbo Kentucky, Jim Hood Mississippi, Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon Missouri, McGrath Montana, Jon Bruning Nebraska, George Chanos Nevada, Petro Ohio, Drew Edmondson Oklahoma, Corbett, Pennsylvania, Paul Summers Tennessee, Greg Abbott Texas, Mark L. Shurtleff Utah, McDonnell Virginia, Rob McKenna Washington, Patrick Crank Wyoming; Criminal Justice Legal Foundation Kent Scheidegger. Habeas Corpus Resource Center Michael Laurence Press; Human Advocates Weissbrodt; Physicians Enzinna; Concannon Ira Sacks.

Classification Label: 1