District of Arizona  
line decor
  
line decor
   
 
 
Capital Habeas Cases 2007
November 29, 2007--West v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
November 28, 2007--Beaty v. Schriro--The Ninth Circuit upheld the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief. Opinion
November 27, 2007--Runningeagle v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
November 15, 2007--Detrich v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
October 24, 2007--Wood v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
September 25, 2007--Greenway v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
September 25, 2007--Schurz v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order
--September 4, 2007--Landrigan v. Schriro--The Ninth Circuit, en banc, recalled its mandate on a remanded from the Supreme Court, which in Schriro v. Landrigan, 127 S. Ct. 1933 (2007), had reversed the Ninth Circuit and held that the petitioner was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing because he could not make out a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in his attorney’s failure adequately to prepare for sentencing and failure to present mitigating evidence. The Supreme Court also had disagreed with this court’s conclusion that the state court made an unreasonable determination of the facts in finding that the petitioner instructed his attorney not to introduce any mitigating evidence. The en banc court vacated its en banc decision and affirmed the district court’s denial of the habeas petition. Order.
--August 28, 2007--Adams v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Relying on Landrigan v. Schriro, 127 S.Ct 35 (2007), the district court concluded that a defendant who refuses to allow the presentation of any mitigating evidence could not establish Strickland prejudice based on counsel's failure to investigate possible mitigating evidence. The defendant's later change of heart does not alter the analysis. The court denied a Certificate of Appeal ability as to all issues. Order.
--July 26, 2007--Bible v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order.
--June 20, 2007--George Lopez v. Schriro--The the ninth circuit granted a certificate of appeal ability on the claim that counsel was ineffective at the sentencing hearing and remanded the case to the district court. The district court found the claim unexhausted. Opinion.
The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Schriro v. Landrigan, 05-1575. The CHU represents Jeff Landrigan.
In March, an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing on whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate for the sentencing phase of the capital case.
At trial, counsel conducted virtually no investigation for sentencing. Jeff never directed his lawyer not to investigate sentencing issues. In fact, he cooperated with counsel on the investigation that was conducted. At the mitigation hearing, Jeff told the court he did not want his mother or ex-wife to testify on his behalf.
Post-conviction counsel asked for funding for experts and an evidentiary hearing. The state objected to both and the state court denied funding and a hearing. During habeas corpus proceedings in the district court, mitigating evidence was developed--organic brain damage, fetal alcohol and certain genetic predispositions. None of this evidence was developed by trial counsel.
The question before the Supreme Court is whether the Ninth Circuit exceeded its authority under the AEDPA by not deferring to the state court's conclusion that the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was frivolous. In addition the Supreme Court may consider whether defense counsel has a duty to develop and offer evidence favorable to the client, when the client opposes a mitigation investigation.
Supreme Court Cert Petition, Brief in Opposition, Reply, Joint Appendix, Petitioner's Brief, CJLF Amicus, Amicus-27 States, Respondent’s Brief, ABA Amicus, NACDL Amicus, Petitioner's Reply, Argument Transcripts, Opinion, Rehearing.
Ninth Circuit --- 3 Judge Panel Opinion, Oral Argument Transcript, En Banc Opinion.
--May 11, 2007--Lambright v. Schriro--The the ninth circuit ruled that Lambright's counsel was ineffective at the sentencing hearing and remanded the matter for a new sentencing hearing. Opinion.
--March 31, 2007--Gulbrandson v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order.
--March 30, 2007--Adams v. Schriro--The district court denies habeas corpus relief on 13 of the 14 claims. The court maintains the first claim pending a ruling by the United States Supreme Court in Schriro v. Landrigan. Order.
--March 15, 2007--Comer v. Schriro--An en banc panel of the ninth circuit ruled that because Robert Comer "is competent and has voluntarily decided to waive further proceedings, we grant his pro se motions to waive further proceedings, to terminate representation by habeas counsel and for dismissal of his appeal."
Opinion.
--March 6, 2007--Irons v. Carey--The Ninth Circuit reverses the district court and denies habeas relief. Judge Noonan concurred raising constitutional objections to the AEDPA. He wrote, "[t]o allow the legislature to decide a case is to deny the separation [of powers]. To allow the legislature to tell a court how a case should be decided is worse. It allows the legislature to mask itself under judicial robes. It puts forward as the judgment of a court what in actuality is the judgment of the legislature. Impermissibly it mixes the two branches. It does so to the great detriment of the judicial branch which is made to act as if it were performing its judicial task while it has had its ability to perform this task removed." Judge Reinhardt also concurred and noted "[h]having granted the courts the authority to review state convictions under our habeas powers, it seems to me inconsistent with our fundamental obligations as judges to require us, except in unusual or exceptional circumstances, to rule for the state regardless of whether it violated the Constitution. Such a mandate appears to me to tell us how to decide a case. That, for reasons Judge Noonan so well expresses, Congress simply may not do." Opinion
Cjlf_amici_brief Intervenor_united_states
Fpd_amici_brief  
--February 21, 2007--Aryon Williams v. Schriro--The district court denied habeas corpus relief. Order.
--February 5, 2007--Anderson v. Schriro--District court grants a stay and abeyance finding good cause for failure to exhaust is state court under Rhines v. Weber where the Arizona Supreme Court failed to appoint post conviction counsel. Petitioner's one year statute of limitations under 28 USC section 2244(d)(1) was about to expire and he filed a pro se petition in order to protect his right to pursue habeas corpus relief in the federal courts. Order.
--January 26, 2007--Schad v. Schriro--In denying the motion to alter or amend judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), the district court ruled that it has authority to sua sponte issue a Certificate of Appeal ability prior to the petitioner making an application for a COA. Order.
--January 23, 2007--Detrich v. Schriro--The district court orders petitioner to testify at an evidentiary hearing on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Order.

 

 
 

 

Phoenix
850 W. Adams Street
Suite 201
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2730
Telephone :602-382-2700
Tucson
407 W. Congress Street
Suite 501
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1310
Telephone :520-879-7500
Yuma
2285 S. 4th. Avenue
Suite 2E
Yuma, Arizona 85364
Telephone :928-314-1780
Flagstaff
123 N. San Francisco Street
Suite 204
Flagstaff, Arizona 86001
Telephone :928-213-1942
Salt Lake City
46 West Broadway
Suite 110
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Telephone :801-524-6043