Hurles, et al v. Schriro, et al

Petitioner: Richard Dean Hurles
Respondent: George Herman and Dora B Schriro
Case Number: 2:2000cv00118
Filed: January 21, 2000
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Pinal
Presiding Judge: Robert C Broomfield
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
May 19, 2016 200 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Petitioner Hurles' claim of judicial bias is DENIED and Hurles' claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting a certificate of appealability on Hurles' judicial bias claim and his ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim. The Clerk shall enter judgment. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 5/19/16. (LSP)
May 11, 2016 198 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying as moot 196 Petitioner's Motion for Reporter's Transcript of Hearing. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 5/10/16.(LSP)
January 26, 2016 178 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying in part 174 Respondents' motion to strike, see PDF document for details. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 1/26/16.(LSP)
January 4, 2016 170 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 161 Petitioner's motion to compel disclosure. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 1/4/16. (EJA)
November 17, 2008 108 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's 107 Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's request to amend the Certificate of Appealability is GRANTED IN PART. The Certificate of Appealability is am ended to include the following issue: Whether the Court erred in determining that Petitioner was not denied effective assistance of counsel on appeal when counsel failed to raise on appeal a claim asserting that the sentencing court had failed to consider the "cumulative weight" of his proffered mitigation. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 11/15/08. (SAT)
September 30, 2008 99 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER that Petitioner's (Dkt. 25) Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas is DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly. The stay of execution entered on 01/04/00 (Dkt. 3) is VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting a Certificate of Appealability as to thefollowing issues listed in this order. The Clerk of Court to send a courtesy copy of this Order to Rachelle M. Resnick, Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 09/22/08. (ESL)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hurles, et al v. Schriro, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Richard Dean Hurles
Represented By: Michael Aaron Harwin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: George Herman
Represented By: Jim D Nielsen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Dora B Schriro
Represented By: Jim D Nielsen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?