Gulbrandson, et al v. Stewart, et al

Filing 97

ORDER granting 96 Petitioner's Renewed Request for Authorization for Habeas Counsel to Conduct State Court Litigation. In addition to clemency-related proceedings, federally-appointed counsel is authorized to represent Petitioner in state court for the purpose of seeking state post-conviction relief under Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. Signed by Senior Judge Stephen M McNamee on 1/23/2014.(ALS)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 David Gulbrandson, Petitioner, 10 11 v. 12 Dora B. Schriro, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 ) No. CV-98-02024-PHX-SMM ) ) DEATH PENALTY CASE ) ) ) ) ORDER ) ) ) ) ) 15 16 Before the Court is Petitioner’s request for authorization of federal habeas counsel to 17 appear in state court litigation. (Doc. 96.) Having reviewed the motion, the Court finds good 18 cause to permit Petitioner’s federally-appointed counsel to represent him in a successive state 19 post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. See 20 18 U.S.C. § 3599(e); Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 190 n.7 (2009). By granting 21 Petitioner’s motion, the Court does not purport to encourage, approve, or convey any position 22 with respect to the merits of the proposed litigation. 23 Based on the foregoing, 24 IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Renewed Request for Authorization for Habeas 25 Counsel to Conduct State Court Litigation (Doc. 96) is GRANTED. In addition to 26 clemency-related proceedings, federally-appointed counsel is authorized to represent 27 /// 28 /// 1 Petitioner in state court for the purpose of seeking state post-conviction relief under Rule 32 2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. 3 DATED this 23rd day of January, 2014. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?