West v. Brewer
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14662
9th Cir.2011Background
- West seeks emergency stay of execution set for July 19, 2011 in Arizona; district court denied TRO/preliminary injunction; he appealed and moved for injunction under Circuit Rule 27-3; standard requires likelihood of success, irreparable harm, favorable balance of equities, and public interest; court finds no substantial risk of severe pain from Arizona's execution protocol; representations by Arizona's counsel described full protocol and availability of drugs; court denies motion; Exhibit A DO-710 outlines detailed execution procedures.
- Court applied Beaty v. Brewer framework for preliminary injunctive relief and concluded West failed to show risk of severe pain due to protocol and available alternatives.
- Court relied on Baze v. Rees to evaluate constitutional risk of pain and concluded the risk is not substantial.
- The telephonic argument included assurances that the protocol would be followed and drugs are in possession and available for West's execution.
- The order emphasizes no deviation from protocol without Director's consent and that the motion is DENIED.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether West is likely to succeed on the merits | West argues risk of severe pain under protocol | Arizona shows no substantial risk given protocol | No likelihood of success on merits |
| Whether West will suffer irreparable harm without relief | Immediate execution causes irreparable injury | No demonstrated risk of irreparable harm | No irreparable harm shown |
| Whether the balance of equities tips toward West | Staying execution serves constitutional rights | Equities favor procedural compliance and orderly execution | Equities do not favor relief |
| Whether injunction is in public interest | Public interest in compliance with law and humane procedure | Public interest in carrying out valid death sentence | Public interest does not support an injunction |
| Whether the standard requires substantial risk of severe pain | Protocol may cause pain if misapplied | Protocol, as represented, avoids substantial pain | Not shown under current record |
Key Cases Cited
- Beaty v. Brewer, 649 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2011) (requirements for preliminary injunction and likelihood of success balancing)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (Supreme Court 2008) (injunctions require likelihood of irreparable harm and balance of equities)
- Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (Supreme Court 2008) (risk of severe pain must be substantial to warrant relief)