Danny Jones v. Charles Ryan

106 F.4th 1010
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 10, 2024
Docket18-99005
StatusPublished

This text of 106 F.4th 1010 (Danny Jones v. Charles Ryan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Danny Jones v. Charles Ryan, 106 F.4th 1010 (9th Cir. 2024).

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANNY LEE JONES, No. 18-99005

Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:01-cv- 00384-SRB v.

CHARLES L. RYAN, OPINION

Respondent-Appellee.

On Remand from United States Supreme Court

Filed July 10, 2024

Before: Michael Daly Hawkins, Sidney R. Thomas, and Morgan Christen, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam Opinion 2 JONES V. RYAN

SUMMARY *

Habeas Corpus / Death Penalty

On remand from the Supreme Court for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Thornell v. Jones, 602 U.S. __, 144 S. Ct. 1302 (2024), the panel affirmed the judgment of the district court.

COUNSEL

Amanda Bass (argued), Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defenders Office, Phoenix, Arizona; Leticia Marquez, Assistant Federal Public Defender; Jon M. Sands, Federal Public Defender, District of Arizona; Federal Public Defender's Office, Tucson, Arizona; Jean-Claude Andre, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, Santa Monica, California; Barbara A. Smith and J. Bennett Clark, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, St. Louis, Missouri; Kristin H. Corradini, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, Chicago, Illinois; for Petitioner-Appellant. Jeffrey L. Sparks (argued), Deputy Solicitor General, Chief of Capital Litigation Section; Lacey S. Gard, Chief Counsel; Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney General; Office of the Arizona Attorney General, Phoenix, Arizona; for Respondent-Appellee.

* This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. JONES V. RYAN 3

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court remanded this appeal for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion. Thornell v. Jones, 602 U.S. __, 144 S.Ct. 1302, 1314 (2024). Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s opinion, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
106 F.4th 1010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danny-jones-v-charles-ryan-ca9-2024.