Pippin v. Quarterman, et al, No. 07-70007 (5th Cir. 2007)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D March 28, 2007 No. 07-70007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk ROY LEE PIPPIN Plaintiff - Appellant v. NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN; JOHN DOE, Warden, TDCJ-ID, Walls Unit; JOHN DOE, Executioner, TDCJ-ID, Walls Unit; RICK PERRY, Governor, State of Texas Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston H007-0982 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-appellant Roy Lee Pippin is scheduled to be executed by the State of Texas on March 29, 2007. Pippin was convicted of murdering more than one person during the same criminal transaction and murdering one of the victims during the course of a kidnapping. * Pippin was sentenced 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 1 to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence. App. May 21, 1997). Pippin v. State, No. 72,252 (Tex. Crim. Pippin unsuccessfully petitioned for state and federal habeas corpus relief. See generally Pippin v. Dretke, 434 F.3d 782 (5th Cir. 2005), cert denied, 127 S. Ct. 351 (2006). Pippin, acting pro se, filed an action in district court on March 23, 2007, challenging the combination of drugs used by the State of Texas to administer lethal injections. Pippin asserted that the drugs may paralyze but not produce unconsciousness, constituting cruel and unusual punishment. The district court dismissed Pippin s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, holding that Pippin was dilatory in raising his challenge to the drug combination used. Quarterman, No. H007-0982 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 26, 2007). Pippin v. We affirm the district court s final judgment entered March 26, 2007, for essentially the reasons given in its Memorandum and Order. Harris v. Johnson, 376 F.3d 414 (5th Cir. 2004). AFFIRMED. DENIED. Pippin s motion for a stay of execution is The mandate shall issue forthwith. 2 See

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.