Donald Beaty v. Janice Brewer
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 10878
9th Cir.2011Background
- Donald Beaty was scheduled for execution in Arizona on May 25, 2011, after district court denied his TRO/PI.
- Beaty filed an Emergency Motion Under Circuit Rule 27-3 for an Injunction in the Ninth Circuit.
- The panel denied Beaty relief and the court issued an order denying rehearing en banc; a dissent and concurrence accompany the order.
- The court applied Winter v. NRDC to test preliminary injunctive relief requirements (likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of equities, public interest).
- Beaty challenged a late-night substitution of pentobarbital for sodium thiopental as the first drug in Arizona’s three-drug protocol; Beaty argued due process and constitutional review were obstructed by the change with insufficient notice.
- The majority denied relief, concluding Beaty did not satisfy Winter standards; the stay was denied and execution proceeded as scheduled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Beaty is likely to succeed on the merits | Beaty argues the new protocol violates constitutional standards. | State asserts protocol is constitutionally valid and Beaty provided no substantial support. | No likelihood of success; injunction denied. |
| Whether due process requires a stay to review protocol changes | Beaty deserves notice and opportunity to be heard regarding the substitution. | Beaty had sufficient process; discovery not required here. | Beaty failed to show needed due process; stay denied. |
| Whether Winter standards apply given timing of execution | Winter factors should be relaxed due to last-minute change. | Winter applies; no irreparable harm shown; standard not met. | Winter standards applied; standard not satisfied. |
| Whether federal review should override state court judgments and timing | Court should intervene to preserve constitutional rights under time pressure. | Federal courts should not substitute judgment or disrupt state execution timeline absent merit. | No en banc relief; defer to standard precedents; execution proceeds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Winter v. NRDC, 555 U.S. 7 (U.S. 2008) (test for preliminary injunctions)
- Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (U.S. 2008) (cause-of-ill effects and standard for execution protocols)
- Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573 (U.S. 2006) (heightened standard for stays of execution)
- Nelson v. Campbell, 541 U.S. 637 (U.S. 2004) (priority of opportunity to bring claims in stay context)
- Pavatt v. Jones, 627 F.3d 1336 (10th Cir. 2010) (approval of similar protocol with discovery and evidentiary hearing)
- Powell v. Thomas, 641 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2011) (approval of pentobarbital substitution for thiopental)
- Dickens v. Brewer, 631 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2011) (recognizes limits of reviewing facial constitutionality of protocols)