On March 10, 2006, Carlos Gonzalez Magallon, the Consul General of Mexico in Houston, Texas filed a lawsuit as the Next Friend of Angel Maturino Resendiz, a Mexican national who was being held on death row in the Harris County Jail in Houston Texas. Magallon claimed that Resendiz was incompetent ...
read more >
On March 10, 2006, Carlos Gonzalez Magallon, the Consul General of Mexico in Houston, Texas filed a lawsuit as the Next Friend of Angel Maturino Resendiz, a Mexican national who was being held on death row in the Harris County Jail in Houston Texas. Magallon claimed that Resendiz was incompetent and needed someone to bring this lawsuit on his behalf. Magallon complained to the Court that the lethal injection method used by the defendants would allow Resendiz to experience an unconstitutionally high level of pain. Specifically, he objected to the use of a short-acting anesthetic, which he claimed would wear off before the process was complete, leaving Resendiz in excrutiating pain from the injection of potassium chloride. He also complained that the use of a paralytic agent during the process would render Resendiz unable to alert the executioners that the anesthetic had worn off, while at the same time suffocating him to death because the paralysis would prevent him from using his lungs. He asked the court to stay the execution of Resendiz and to enjoin the defendants from using the lethal injection method in question.
On March 28, 2006, the defendants asked the District Court to dismiss the complaint, arguing that Magallon lacked standing to bring the lawsuit because it had not been demonstrated that Resendiz was incompetent to bring the lawsuit on his own behalf, that the plaintiff had unreasonably delayed bringing the complaint, and that the complaint was frivolous because the probability of the inmate suffering any pain was "so remote as to be nonexistent."
On April 27, 2006, the District Court (Judge Lee H. Rosenthal) dismissed the case, finding that there had been no demonstration of Resendiz's incompetence and that the lawsuit had been raised after an unreasonable delay. Gonzalez Magallon v. Livingston, 2006 WL 1168795 (S.D.Tex. Apr. 27, 2006). Magallon appealed, and on June, 16, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit partially affirmed the District Court's decision and remanded the case back to the District Court and issued an order that Resendiz should be allowed to file an appropriate motion to be substituted as the proper plaintiff in the case. Gonzalez Magallon v. Livingston, 453 F.3d 268 (5th Cir. 2006).
On June 23, 2006, Resendiz was substituted as the plaintiff in the case, and he asked the District Court for a preliminary injunction, a temporary restraining order, and a stay of his execution. Three days later, the District Court (Judge Rosenthal) denied all of his requests, finding that Resendiz was merely trying to delay his execution rather than advancing a legitimate legal challenge to the lethal injection method in question. Resendiz v. Livingston, 2006 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 43107 (S.D.Tex. Jun. 23, 2006).
On June 27, 2006, Angel Maturino Resendiz was executed by lethal injection, and the next day, the District Court (Judge Rosenthal) dismissed the case as moot.Kristen Sagar - 09/17/2007