Christopher Lee Price v. Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections
920 F.3d 1317
11th Cir.2019Background
- Christopher Price, an Alabama death-row inmate, challenged Alabama’s use of midazolam in its three‑drug lethal‑injection protocol and sought to be executed by nitrogen hypoxia instead.
- Alabama amended its execution statute (effective June 1, 2018) to authorize nitrogen hypoxia and required inmates whose sentences were final before that date to elect the method within 30 days of June 1, 2018.
- Price did not timely elect; he wrote the warden on January 11, 2019 asking for nitrogen hypoxia and was told the 30‑day window had passed; the Attorney General’s Office denied his belated request.
- Price filed a second § 1983 action (Feb. 2019) asserting an Eighth Amendment method‑of‑execution claim against midazolam and a Fourteenth Amendment equal‑protection claim based on alleged disparate treatment in allowing other inmates to elect nitrogen hypoxia.
- The district court denied Price’s motions for preliminary injunction and his cross‑motion for summary judgment. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, denied an emergency stay of execution, and explained that Price failed to show a substantial likelihood of success on either his equal‑protection or Eighth Amendment claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Price) | Defendant's Argument (State/ADOC) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of belated election to nitrogen hypoxia violated Equal Protection | Price: State allowed other inmates to elect nitrogen hypoxia (some outside 30‑day window) or treated him differently; thus disparate treatment | State: All inmates had the same 30‑day window; Price received form and counsel; other inmates elected timely; no disparate treatment | Court: No equal‑protection violation—Price wasn’t similarly situated to timely electors and the 30‑day rule is rationally related to legitimate penological interests |
| Whether nitrogen hypoxia is an "available" alternative under Baze/Glossip/Bucklew | Price: Alabama statutorily adopted nitrogen hypoxia; adoption makes it an available, feasible, readily implemented alternative | State: Nitrogen hypoxia unavailable because ADOC has no protocol and Price missed statutory opt‑in window; logistics and safety concerns | Court: Nitrogen hypoxia is "available" because Alabama’s legislature authorized it; the State cannot claim unavailable after adoption |
| Whether Price showed nitrogen hypoxia would significantly reduce a substantial risk of severe pain compared to midazolam protocol (Eighth Amendment) | Price: Expert declaration and a draft academic report indicate midazolam poses substantial risk and nitrogen hypoxia is less painful | State: Midazolam protocol is constitutional; the State contested feasibility and the comparative safety; need detailed protocol evidence | Court: Price failed to prove nitrogen hypoxia would significantly reduce risk; district court clearly erred relying on unreliable draft report and noncomparative expert opinion; no substantial likelihood of success |
| Whether a stay of execution is warranted (preliminary injunction factors) | Price: Meets likelihood of success and irreparable harm; stay required pending merits | State: Price cannot show substantial likelihood of success; stay would harm State and victims’ interests | Held: Denied—Price did not show substantial likelihood of success on equal‑protection or Eighth Amendment claims; injunction factors not met |
Key Cases Cited
- Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (2008) (Eighth Amendment challenge requires showing an objectively intolerable risk and identification of a feasible, readily implemented alternative)
- Glossip v. Gross, 576 U.S. 863 (2015) (reaffirmed Baze standard and required plaintiffs to identify an alternative that significantly reduces a substantial risk of severe pain)
- Bucklew v. Precythe, 139 S. Ct. 1112 (2019) (clarified availability and detail requirements for proposed alternatives; States need not adopt untried methods)
- Arthur v. Commissioner, Ala. Dep't of Corr., 840 F.3d 1268 (11th Cir. 2016) (discussed alternative‑method availability and preliminary injunction standards)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate indifference standard informing Eighth Amendment risk analysis)