Wood v. Ryan

760 F.3d 919, 2014 WL 3558126, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13782
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 18, 2014
Docket08-99003
StatusPublished

This text of 760 F.3d 919 (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
Wood v. Ryan, 760 F.3d 919, 2014 WL 3558126, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13782 (9th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

ORDER

WARDLAW, Circuit Judge:

Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Stay of Execution. Because the three-judge panel consisting of Judges Thomas, Gould, and Bybee has jurisdiction over Appeal No. 08-99003 and petitioner’s execution is not “imminent,” the Petition for Writ of Habe- *920 as Corpus and Motion for Stay of Execution is referred to the Clerk for determination by the three-judge panel. See 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.... ”); 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.”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

Related

Jones v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections
811 F.3d 1288 (Eleventh Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
760 F.3d 919, 2014 WL 3558126, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-ryan-ca9-2014.