Hines v. Johnson , 83 F. App'x 592 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          December 9, 2003
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
    _____________________                                   Clerk
    No. 03-21173
    _____________________
    BOBBY LEE HINES, BILLY FRANK VICKERS,
    and KEVIN LEE ZIMMERMAN,
    Plaintiffs-Appellants
    v.
    GARY JOHNSON ET AL,
    Defendants-Appellees
    ---------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    (H-03-5594)
    ---------------------
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Plaintiffs-Appellants, all death row inmates facing imminent
    execution, appeal from the district court’s denial of their 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     action seeking a permanent injunction to bar the use
    of lethal injection as currently constituted.                         Our review of their
    filings and the order of the district court denying their claims
    convinces us that the district court ruled correctly.
    This matter poses both procedural and substantive questions.
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
    published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    We are keenly aware that the Supreme Court has under consideration
    the procedural question whether § 1983 is available as a vehicle
    for mounting attacks such as this; but until a different rule is
    announced, we continue to follow the procedure described by the
    district court.    See, e.g., Gomez v. United States District Court
    for the Northern District of California, 
    503 U.S. 653
     (1992);
    Martinez v. Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 
    292 F.3d 417
     (5th Cir.
    2002),   cert.   denied,   
    535 U.S. 1091
       (2002).   Substantively,
    Plaintiffs-Appellants have submitted evidence that appears to be
    facially stronger than that which has supported prior complaints of
    this nature; but we are not in a posture to deal further with it
    under our present precedent.
    For essentially the same reasons as expressed by the district
    court in its Order of December 8, 2003, we affirm that ruling and
    dismiss the Plaintiffs-Appellants’ appeal.
    DISMISSED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-21173

Citation Numbers: 83 F. App'x 592

Judges: Barksdale, Higginbotham, Per Curiam, Wiener

Filed Date: 12/9/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/1/2023