Main Page

 


Pending Cert Petitions of Interest

Last Updated: Monday, June 6, 2011


Ryan v. Gonzales, 10-930 (filed Jan. 18, 2011)

Questions presented:

Several years after Gonzales's counsel initiated federal habeas proceedings and filed an exhaustive petition seeking relief, counsel asserted that Gonzales was incompetent to communicate rationally and the proceedings should be indefinitely stayed pending possible restoration of competency. Based on 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2), the Ninth Circuit agreed, even though Gonzales's claims were record-based or purely legal.

Did the Ninth Circuit err when it held that 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2) -- which provides that an indigent capital state inmate pursuing federal habeas relief "shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys" -- impliedly entitles a death row inmate to stay the federal habeas proceedings he initiated if he is not competent to assist counsel?

Click here to view the warden's certiorari petition. Click here to view the amicus brief by Utah, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, and Washington in support of the warden.

On May 31, 2011, the Supreme Court invited the Acting Solicitor General to file an amicus brief expressing the views of the United States.

Cook v. Arizona, 10-9742 (filed Jan. 26, 2011) (non-capital):

Questions presented:

In an Arizona capital case, a post conviction proceeding in the trial court is mandated by statute and criminal rule after completion of the direct appeal. It is designated an integral part of the original prosecution. It is initiated by the Arizona Supreme Court, without action by a capital defendant. That Court chooses and apppoints counsel for the post conviction proceeding. If Petitioner claims that his counsel at trial or upon appeal were ineffective he can only assert such claims in the post conviction proceeding.

The question presented is whether Petitioner is entitled under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to have effective post conviction counsel to raise those claims, because that proceeding represents Petitioner's first review allowed by the Arizona courts for such claims.

Click here to view Cook's certiorari petition. The same day the petition was filed, Cook filed a motion for stay of execution. The stay motion was granted on April 4, 2011, pending a ruling on the certiorari petition.