Martinez v. Thornell

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Gilbert Martinez, No. CV-20-00517-PHX-DJH

10 Petitioner, DEATH-PENALTY CASE

11 v. ORDER

12 Ryan Thornell, et al.,1

13 Respondents. 14 Pending before the Court is Petitioner Gilbert Martinez’s unopposed motion for 15 leave to file a reply that exceeds the 100-page limitation imposed by Local Rule 3.5(b) by 16 7 pages. (Doc. 63.) 17 Pursuant to the Court’ s Local Rules, a capital habeas petitioner may file a reply that 18 exceeds the 100-page limitation if the petitioner demonstrates good cause. LRCiv 3.5(b). 19 The Court has reviewed Martinez’s motion and the lodged reply and finds that he has 20 demonstrated good cause to grant the motion. In addition to the case-specific reasons 21 previously addressed by the Court (see Doc. 39), the Court finds that the recent decisions 22 by the United States Supreme Court in Shinn v. Ramirez, 142 S. Ct. 1718 (2022); Cruz v. 23 Arizona, 143 S. Ct. 650 (2023), decided after Martinez filed his amended petition, 24 demonstrate further good cause to grant the request. 25 Accordingly, 26

27 1 Pursuant to Rule 25(d), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Ryan Thornell, the 28 Director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, is substituted for the former Director, David Shinn. 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Martinez’s Unopposed Motion to Exceed 2| Page Limits. (Doc. 63.) The Clerk of Court is directed to file the lodged Reply (Doc. 64). 3 Dated this 5th day of June, 2023. 4 5 5 ZL ee □ 6 norable'Diang/4. Huretewa 7 United States District Fudge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-