Legal Opinion · Dissent
Arthur v. Thomas
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided March 21, 2012No. 11-15548Published
1DissentHull, Circuit Judge
I respectfully dissent because the majority opinion fails to follow our binding precedent about the substitution of the first drug pentobarbital for sodium thiopental in Alabama’s three-drug lethal injection protocol. Based on this circuit’s binding precedent, as outlined below, the district court concluded that (1) Arthur’s § 1983 claims based on the Eighth Amendment and Due Process were barred by the statute of limitations because the April 2011 substitution of pentobarbital for sodium thiopental is not a significant alteration in the 2002 lethal injection protocol so as to restart the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Nelson v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Cheryl Cohen, on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated v. Office Depot, Inc., a Florida CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2000
- Griffin Industries, Inc. v. IrvinCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.