Styers v. Ryan
| James Lynn Styers |
| Charles L Ryan |
| 2:2012cv02332 |
| October 30, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Pinal |
| James A Teilborg |
| 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
36
ORDER denying 34 to Alter or Amend Judgment; denying 35 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 10/24/2017.(KAS)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that Styers's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly. (See document for complete details). Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 8/24/17. (SLQ)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that no later than July 10, 2017, Respondents shall file a brief addressing the arguments raised in Styers' brief. Styers may file a reply no later July 17, 2017 [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/9/17. (MAW)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER that Respondents' 9 MOTION to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. ORDERED that Claim 1 of Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1); Claims 2, 4, and 6 ar e DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is stayed pending the issuance of a decision by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Styers v. Ryan, No. 2:98-cv-2244, Appeal No. 12-16952. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 4/24/2013. (LFIG)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER OF APPOINTMENT. ORDERED granting 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Appointing Julie S. Hall as Lead Counsel and Amy B. Krauss as Co-Counsel for Petitioner in this federal habeas corpus proceeding, nunc pro tunc to September 10, 2012. FURTHER O RDERED granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis FURTHER ORDERED that the Arizona Attorney General shall file a notice of appearance with the Court within ten (10) days from the entry of this Order FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of t his Order be served by the Clerk of Court upon Kent Cattani, Assistant Arizona Attorney General, pursuant to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court forward a copy of this Order to the CJA Voucher Review Analyst. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 11/20/12. (MAP)
|
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
| Search for this case: Styers v. Ryan | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: James Lynn Styers | |
| Represented By: | Julie Singleton Hall |
| Represented By: | Amy Beth Krauss |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Charles L Ryan | |
| Represented By: | Ginger Jarvis |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Alan Zick |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.
