Powell v. Thomas
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12075
| 11th Cir. | 2011Background
- Powell, on death row in Alabama, sues under §1983 challenging the state's lethal-injection protocol after ADOC replaced sodium thiopental with pentobarbital.
- District court dismissed as time-barred under Alabama's two-year limitations for §1983 actions; no temporary stay requested.
- Accrual date determined by McNair v. Allen: challenge to a method of execution accrues at the later of state review completion or a significant change in the protocol, here July 31, 2002.
- Powell argues the 2011 protocol change is a significant alteration and the secrecy claim regarding protocol changes is timely.
- This appeal follows Williams and Powell (Williams) decisions holding the change to pentobarbital is not a significant alteration and that the secrecy claim is barred by limitations.
- Court affirms dismissal as time-barred and denies emergency stay request.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the lethal-injection protocol change is a significant alteration triggering accrual | Powell argues the switch to pentobarbital is a significant change | ADOC maintains no significant alteration occurred | Not significant; claim barred by limitations |
| Whether Powell's §1983 Eighth Amendment claim accrued on 7/31/2002 and is time-barred | Accrual began with lethal-injection protocol change | Accrual aligns with McNair's significant-change rule | Accrual date 7/31/2002; deadline July 31, 2004; timely only if within window |
| Whether Powell's secrecy-of-protocol claim is time-barred | Secrecy surrounding method of execution should revive timely review | Change relates to same ongoing protocol and is barred | Barred by statute of limitations; binding Powell(Williams) precedent applied |
Key Cases Cited
- Crowe v. Donald, 528 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir. 2008) (tort-style §1983 actions subject to state personal-injury limitations)
- McNair v. Allen, 515 F.3d 1168 (11th Cir. 2008) (accrual for method-of-execution challenges; significant-change rule)
- Jones v. Preuit & Mauldin, 876 F.2d 1480 (11th Cir. 1989) (two-year limitations period for §1983 actions in Alabama)
- Nelson v. Campbell, 541 U.S. 637 (U.S. 2004) (§1983 as vehicle for stay-based Eighth Amendment claims based on altered protocols)
- Powell v. Williams, 641 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2011) (holding that replacement of thiopental with pentobarbital not a significant alteration; binding precedent for accrual/notice issues)
- Pavatt v. Jones, 627 F.3d 1336 (10th Cir. 2010) (barbiturates; difference in duration not a significant alteration)
- Powell v. Thomas, 643 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2011) (affirmed district court; rejection of claims as time-barred)