Gallegos, et al v. Stewart, et al
| Dora B Schriro |
| Michael Gallegos |
| George Herman and Charles Ryan |
| 2:2001cv01909 |
| October 5, 2001 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Pinal |
| Neil V Wake |
| Prisoner: Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
250
ORDER - Gallegos's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED. As provided in the judgment, the State of Arizona is directed to vacate Gallegos's death sentence and impose a lesser sentence unless it notifies this Court, within 120 days from the entry of this Judgment. The Clerk shall close this case and forward a copy of this Order to Janet Johnson, Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 12/7/20. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
222
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting the motion (Doc. 221 ). Sally Ake, Russell Randall, and Noah Stalvey are permitted to testify via video- teleconference. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing Petitioner's counsel to make the arrangements for such testimony. (See document for complete details). Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 10/27/20. (SLQ)
|
|
Filing
220
ORDER granting in part 209 Motion. See Order for further details. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 10/19/20. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
219
ORDER granting 212 Motion to Present In Person Testimony of Expert Witness. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 10/15/20. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
199
ORDER denying 192 Motion to Vacate and reaffirming the remaining deadlines set forth in this Court's Orders (Docs. 173 , 187 ). Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 9/4/20. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
198
ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties' joint motion for an extension of the disclosure deadline (Doc. 197 ) is denied. The September 11, 2020 expert report deadline stands for all experts, not just Dr. Boake. See document for complete details. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 9/1/2020. (WLP)
|
|
Filing
160
ORDER - An evidentiary hearing will be held to determine whether resentencing counsel performed ineffectively under Strickland by failing to present evidence that Gallegos suffered from brain damage. The Court will issue a separate order setting this matter for a scheduling conference. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 2/19/20. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
151
ORDER denying 149 Gallegos's Motion for Reconsideration. See attached Order for details. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V. Wake on 8/28/2017. (RMW)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER denying 113 Motion for Reconsideration / Alter or Amend Judgment. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 10/20/08.(DMT, )
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER that Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 74 is DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly. FURTHER ORDERED that the stay of execution entered by this Court on October 16, 2001 (Dkt. 5), is VACATED. FU RTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability is GRANTED as to the following issues: Whether the Court erred in determining that Claim 9, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing, lacked merit. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court forward a copy of this Order to Rachelle M. Resnick, Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court, 1501 W. Washington, Phoenix,AZ 85007-3329. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 9/29/08. (KMG)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
