Court Opinion

ID: 9573385
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:54:05.503858+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:40:48.096723
License: Public Domain

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge,
with whom
MARTIN, COLE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges,
join, dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc.
I dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc for the reasons expressed in my concurring opinion in Getsy v. Strickland, No. 08-4199, slip op. at 8 (6th Cir. Aug. 13, 2009) and for the reasons articulated in Judge Gilman’s dissents in Cooey v. Strickland, 479 F.3d 412, 424 (6th Cir.2007) (Cooey II), and Cooey v. Strickland, 489 F.3d 775, 776 (6th Cir.2007).
As I have previously emphasized, “‘[a] suggestion for rehearing en banc is an extraordinary procedure which is intended to bring to the attention of the entire Court a precedent-setting error of exceptional public importance or an opinion which directly conflicts with prior Supreme Court or Sixth Circuit precedent.’ ” Bell v. Bell, 512 F.3d 223, 250 (6th Cir.2008) (Moore, J., dissenting) (quoting 6 Cir. R. 35(c) (emphasis added)). This is precisely that case.
Determining when the statute of limitations begins to run for a death-sentenced prisoner who wishes to challenge a state’s method of execution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is tantamount to determining whether the prisoner will be able to challenge the method of execution at all. Certainly, the determination of when a person becomes time barred from challenging a procedure that may violate his or her constitutional rights is of “exceptional public importance.” Because the panel majority in Cooey II fundamentally erred in determining the moment at which the statute of limitations begins to run in a § 1983 method-of-execution challenge — and we are thus improperly constrained in Getsy■ — en banc review is required.
Furthermore, as stated in my concurring opinion in Getsy, applying Cooey II’s “precedent-setting error” in Getsy’s case is unconscionable. Due to the majority’s refusal to review Cooey II by way of its application in Getsy, Getsy will be executed on August 18, 2009, without ever having the opportunity to have a court consider the merits of his Eighth Amendment challenge to his method of execution, a method that a court may well find unconstitutional just a few short months following his death by lethal injection. For the foregoing reasons, I dissent from the denial of en banc review.