United States Sixth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 challenge to Ohio's lethal injection method of execution, the dismissal of the action is affirmed where: 1) the continuing-violations doctrine did not toll the statute of limitations; 2) the statute of limitations set forth in Cooey v. Strickland, 479 F.3d 412 (6th Cir. 2007) (Cooey II), did not constitute a "new rule of law" that could not be applied retroactively; and 3) Cooey II did not fully adopt the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's statute-of-limitations provisions.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/01/2009
• Published 09/01/2009

Judges

• Before BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; MOORE and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ON BRIEF:Timothy F. Sweeney, Law Office of Timothy Farrell Sweeney, Cleveland, Ohio, S. Adele Shank, Law Office of S. Adele Shank, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant. Charles L. Wille, Office of the Ohio Attorney General, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.