Joseph R. Wood v. Ryan

760 F.3d 918, 2014 WL 3610502
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 18, 2014
Docket08-99003
StatusPublished

This text of 760 F.3d 918 (Joseph R. Wood v. 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
Joseph R. Wood v. Ryan, 760 F.3d 918, 2014 WL 3610502 (9th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

ORDER

Petitioner filed a Consolidated Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Stay of Execution before the Honorable Kim W. Wardlaw. Circuit Judge Wardlaw referred the Petition and Motion to this panel pursuant to Cir. R. 22-2(c) (“Once a case is assigned to a death penalty panel, the panel will handle all matters pertaining to the case_”) and Cir. R. 22-4(e) (“In all capital cases where petitioner seeks a stay of execution, the Clerk shall refer any motion for a stay of execution to the death penalty panel.”).

Under Fed. R.App. P. 22(a), “[a]n application for a writ of habeas corpus must be made to the appropriate district court.” See also Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 660-61, 116 S.Ct. 2833, 135 L.Ed.2d 827 (1996) (noting that the Rule would “bar consideration of original habeas petitions in the courts of appeal”). Pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 22(a), if a habeas petition is filed in the Court of Appeals, “the application must be transferred to the appropriate district court.”

Therefore, the Consolidated Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for a Stay of Execution is transferred to the District of Arizona.

TRANSFERRED.

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

Related

Felker v. Turpin
518 U.S. 651 (Supreme Court, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
760 F.3d 918, 2014 WL 3610502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-r-wood-v-ryan-ca9-2014.