Spears, et al v. Schriro, et al

Filing 179

ORDER granting Petitioner's 176 Motion and no later than September 23, 2022, Petitioner is to move for any appropriate relief based on Ramirez. Signed by Senior Judge Stephen M McNamee on 9/2/2022. (LFIG)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Anthony Marshall Spears, Petitioner, 10 11 v. 12 Charles L. Ryan, et al., 13 No. CV-00-01051-PHX-SMM DEATH PENALTY CASE ORDER Respondents. 14 15 Before the Court is Petitioner Anthony Spears’s Motion for Ninety Days to 16 Reevaluate Arguments in Light of Shinn v. Ramirez. (Doc. 176.) Spears is an Arizona death 17 row inmate seeking federal habeas relief. His case is before this Court on limited remand 18 from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for reconsideration of, among other issues, two 19 ineffective assistance claims in light of Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012). (Doc. 140.) 20 Spears asks the Court to defer any ruling on his remanded claims while he evaluates the 21 impact of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Ramirez, 142 S. Ct. 1718 (2022). 22 Spears argues that as a result of Ramirez “the legal landscape has shifted in a way 23 that potentially requires amended allegations.” (Doc. 176 at 3.) He also notes that lead 24 counsel in his case has retired and the additional time is required for new lead counsel to 25 become familiar with the case. (Id.) Respondents oppose the motion. (Doc. 177.) They 26 contend that Spears’s request for delay lacks specificity, that any additional requests for 27 relief are foreclosed by Martinez and Ramirez, that the four claims at issue have been fully 28 briefed, and that Spears may be engaging in dilatory litigation tactics. (Id. at 6–9.) 1 Spears cites several cases where district courts have granted such delays such as the 2 one he seeks. (Doc. 176 at 3–4.) In these cases, from the Western District of Tennessee, 3 the requests were unopposed and were made in the first part of June 2022, less than three 4 weeks after the Ramirez decision on May 23, 2022. Spears waited 10 weeks to make his 5 request for further delay, and now almost 90 days have passed since the decision. 6 Under these circumstances, the Court finds that a 30-day delay, in addition to the 7 time that has already passed since Ramirez was decided, is more than sufficient for Spears 8 to reevaluate his arguments and seek whatever relief he feels is appropriate. 9 10 11 12 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Spears’s motion (Doc. 176) as follows: no later than September 23, 2022, Spears to move for any appropriate relief based on Ramirez. Dated this 2nd day of September, 2022. 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?