Atwood v. Shinn et al
| Frank Jarvis Atwood |
| David Shinn, James Kimble, Jeff Van Winkle and Lance Hetmer |
| 2:2022cv00625 |
| April 13, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| John Z Boyle (PS) |
| James A Teilborg |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 42
ORDER: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that no later than Friday, June 17, 2022, counselfor Plaintiff and Defendants must file a status report indicating what, if any, issues remain for resolution and if none the parties shall stipulate to the dismissal of this case. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/10/22. (MJF)
|
|
Filing 41
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: Order granting #28 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying #19 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying #19 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. See Attached Document for Details and Terms of the Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/6/22.(JAT/eg)
|
|
Filing 40
RESPONSE re: #38 Order,, by Defendants Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Chiasson, Laura)
|
|
Filing 39
RESPONSE re: #38 Order,, Second by Plaintiff Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 38
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that Defendants are again ordered to brief: why Plaintiffs proposed accommodation of his Priest standing at his head for the entire time in the execution chamber is not possible to overcome Defendants concerns about someone moving around the execution chamber. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is again ordered to brief: why a last rites ceremony performed prior to entering the execution chamber is a substantial burden on his religion, and specifically exactly how long before death would be religiously inadequate. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that these supplements must be filed no later than 4:00 p.m. today. SEE ATTACHED PDF FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/6/22. (MJF)
|
|
Filing 37
RESPONSE re: #35 Order on Motion to Consolidate Cases,,,,,, by Defendants Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Chiasson, Laura)
|
|
Filing 36
RESPONSE re: #35 Order on Motion to Consolidate Cases,,,,,, by Plaintiff Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 35
ORDER: The motion to consolidate (Doc. #18 in CV 22-625-PHX-JAT(JZB) and Doc. 6 in CV 22-860-PHX-MTL(JZB)) is denied. The Clerk of Court shall file a copy of this order in both cases. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by noon today, Plaintiff shall file a supplemental brief advising the Court of how long last rites ceremony (separate from the tonsure ceremony) will take. Plaintiff shall also address why a last rites ceremony performed prior to entering the execution chamber is a substantial burden on his religion, and specifically exactly how long before death would be religiously inadequate. Additionally, Plaintiff states that confession "is an integral part of last rights [sic]" (Doc. #34 at 5). Plaintiff must confirm that Plaintiff seeks to do last rites in the presence of multiple non-religious people in the execution chamber. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by 12:30 p.m. today, Defendants must file a supplement addressing why Plaintiff's proposed accommodation of his priest standing at his head for the entire time in the execution chamber is not possible to overcome Defendants' concerns about someone moving around the execution chambers. Defendants must also address when they state, "The only limitation Defendants have placed on Atwood's last rites ceremony is that it be performed before Atwood enters the lethal injection room[,]" (Doc. #32 at 6), when exactly they propose to allow Plaintiff to receive last rites. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/06/2022. (Associated Cases: 2:22-cv-00625-JAT--JZB, 2:22-cv-00860-MTL--JZB) (REK)
|
|
Filing 34
REPLY BRIEF by Frank Jarvis Atwood Amended. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 33
REPLY to Response to Motion re: #19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 32
RESPONSE to Motion re: #28 Emergency MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-D)(Chiasson, Laura)
|
|
Filing 31
NOTICE re: Filing of Proposed Form of Injunction by Frank Jarvis Atwood . (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 30
*REPLY to Response to Motion re: #19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Defendants Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Ahl, David) *Modified to correct event, text, and document link on 6/3/2022 (REK).
|
|
Filing 29
ORDER that if Plaintiff seeks an injunction on the agreed-to religious accommodations, the parties must jointly file a proposed form of injunction by Friday, 6/3/22. If no proposed form of injunction is received by this deadline, the Court will deem Plaintiff to have waived an injunction on the agreed-to accommodations. FURTHER ORDERED that if the Court has failed to capture all disputed religious accommodations sought by Plaintiff as underlined above, Plaintiff must file a revised form of preliminary injunction by Friday, 6/3/22. As indicated above, Plaintiff's failure to file any further requests by this deadline, or failure to have such requests contain the specificity required herein, will be deemed to be a waiver of any additional requests. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants must respond to the emergency motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. #28 ) by Saturday, 6/4/22 (the Court has selected a Saturday due to the emergency nature of this request and Defendants may not file on the next business day; the response is due Saturday). FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must file a reply in support of his emergency motion for preliminary injunction by 9:00 AM, Monday, 6/6/22. FURTHER ORDERED that if the method of execution is at any point deemed to be lethal gas, Plaintiff and Defendants must comply with the additional filing requirements set forth above. See order for complete details. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 6/2/22. (NKS)
|
|
Filing 28
Emergency MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Proposed Order)(Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 27
RESPONSE in Opposition re: #19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 26
RESPONSE to Motion re: (18 in 2:22-cv-00625-JAT--JZB, 18 in 2:22-cv-00625-JAT--JZB) MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Associated Cases: 2:22-cv-00625-JAT--JZB, 2:22-cv-00860-MTL--JZB) (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 25
NOTICE re: Areas of Disagreement Regarding Accommodation of Plaintiff's Religious Exercise Request by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle re: #21 Order,,, #24 Order on Motion for Extension of Time,,, . (Sparks, Jeffrey)
|
|
Filing 24
ORDER that Defendants' unopposed motion (Doc. #23 ) is granted as follows: 1. If Defendants agree to Plaintiff's religious exercise requests before and during his execution, the parties must also submit to the Court a proposed form of injunction delineating the specific parameters of any religious visits prior to Plaintiff's execution and conduct during Plaintiff's execution. If Defendants have agreed to facilitate Plaintiff's requests, that proposed form of injunction must be filed no later than Wednesday, 6/1/2022. If Defendants have not agreed to facilitate Plaintiff's requests, they must file a Notice indicating where the parties disagree. 2. Plaintiff must respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #19 ) and Motion to Consolidate (Doc. #18 ) no later than Wednesday, 6/1/2022. 3. Defendants may file a Reply no later than Thursday, 6/2/2022. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 6/1/2022. (RMW)
|
|
Filing 23
MOTION for Extension of Time STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ONE-DAY EXTENSIONTO COMPLY WITH COURTS ORDERS OF MAY 25, 2022 by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Sparks, Jeffrey)
|
|
Remark: Pro hac vice motion(s) granted for Reid Robertson Allison on behalf of Plaintiff Frank Jarvis Atwood. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS)
|
|
Remark: Pro hac vice motion(s) granted for David A Lane on behalf of Plaintiff Frank Jarvis Atwood. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS)
|
|
Filing 22
NOTICE re: Intent to File Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief by Frank Jarvis Atwood re: #16 Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction,, . (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 21
ORDER that if Defendants agree to accommodate Plaintiff's religious exercise requests before and during his execution, the parties must also submit to the Court a proposed form of injunction delineating the specific parameters of any religious visits prior to Plaintiff's execution and conduct during Plaintiff's execution. If Defendants have agreed to facilitate Plaintiff's requests, that proposed form of injunction must be filed no later than Tuesday, 5/31/2022. If Defendants have not agreed to facilitate Plaintiff's requests, they must file a Notice indicating where the parties disagree. See the attached order for additional information. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 5/25/2022. (RMW)
|
|
Filing 20
ORDER: Plaintiff must respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #19 ) and Motion to Consolidate (Doc. #18 ) no later than Tuesday, 5/31/2022. Defendants may file a Reply no later than Wednesday, 6/1/2022. See the attached order for additional information. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 5/25/2022. (RMW)
|
|
Filing 19
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim , MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-B)(Ahl, David)
|
|
Filing 18
MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. **Doc. #17 is being re-docketed by Clerk using the correct event for statistical purposes.** (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Associated Cases: CV-22-00625-PHX-JAT-JZB, CV-22-00860-PHX-JZB) (DXD)
|
|
Filing 17
**Redocketed at Doc. #18 ** MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Associated Cases: 22-cv-625; 22-cv-860) (Sparks, Jeffrey) Modified on 5/23/2022 (DXD).
|
|
Filing 16
ORDER: 1) Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is deemed timely filed. 2) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #10 ) is denied as moot. 3) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3) Defendants must answer Counts One, Two, and Three of the Amended Complaint (Doc. #15 ) or otherwise respond by appropriate motion by 5/25/2022. 4) No later than 5/25/2022, Plaintiff must file a Notice indicating whether and when he intends to file an emergency motion for injunctive relief. See the attached order for additional information. Signed by Senior Judge James A. Teilborg on 5/19/2022. (RMW)
|
|
Filing 15
NOTICE of Filing Amended Pleading pursuant to LRCiv 15.1(b) by Frank Jarvis Atwood . (Attachments: #1 Attachment Amended Complaint showing changes)(Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 14
AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H)(Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 13
REPLY to Response to Motion re: #10 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Ahl, David)
|
|
Filing 12
USCA Case Number re: Application for Permission to File a Second or Successive Habeas Corpus Petition, Ninth Circuit Case Number 22-70084. (BAC)
|
|
Filing 11
RESPONSE to Motion re: #10 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Knight, Amy)
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-B)(Ahl, David)
|
|
Filing 9
*SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle: re: WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS upon Jeff Van Winkle, Warden, ASPC-Florence on 04/15/2022. (Sparks, Jeffrey) *Modified to correct date waiver sent, attorney noticed on 4/21/2022 (LAD).
|
|
Filing 8
*SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle: re: WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS upon David Shinn, Director, ADCRR on 04/15/2022. (Sparks, Jeffrey) *Modified to correct date waiver sent, attorney noticed on 4/21/2022 (LAD).
|
|
Filing 7
*SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle: re: WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS upon James Kimble, Warden, ASPC-Eyman on 04/15/2022. (Sparks, Jeffrey) *Modified to correct date waiver sent, attorney noticed on 4/21/2022 (LAD).
|
|
Filing 6
*SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle: re: WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS upon Lance Hetmer, Assistant Director for Prison Operations on 04/15/2022. (Sparks, Jeffrey) *Modified to correct date waiver sent, attorney noticed on 4/21/2022 (LAD).
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE of Appearance by Jeffrey Lee Sparks on behalf of Lance Hetmer, James Kimble, David Shinn, Jeff Van Winkle. (Sparks, Jeffrey)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Within 10 days of the filing date of this Order, Plaintiff must either serve the Complaint and Summons on each Defendant with a copy of this Order or obtain a waiver of such service. See document for further details. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 4/15/2022. (REK)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must transfer this case to the Phoenix Division to be assigned a Phoenix Division case number and judge, and administratively close the Tucson Division case. Signed by Judge James A Soto on 4/14/22. (MYE)
|
|
Case transferred in from Tucson Division on 04/15/2022. Case Number CV-22-00184-TUC-JAS. All future filings shall reflect the following case number: CV-22-00625-PHX-JAT(JZB). This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MYE)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (BAC)
|
|
Filing 1
PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $402.00, receipt number BAZDC-20556688 filed by Frank Jarvis Atwood. (Perkovich, Joseph) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Ex. A [Order; Atwood v. Days, et al., 2:20-cv-623-JAT-JZB], #3 Exhibit Ex. B [ADCRR Execution Protocol], #4 Exhibit Ex. C [Mar. 17, 2021 letter of ADCRR GC Keogh], #5 Exhibit Ex. D [Jun. 16, 2021 letter to GC Keogh], #6 Exhibit Ex. E [Jun. 30, 2021 letter from GC Keogh], #7 Exhibit Ex. F [Jan. 2, 2022 informal complaint], #8 Exhibit Ex. G [Jan. 18, 2022 ADCRR response], #9 Exhibit Ex. H [Jan. 19, 2022 inmate grievance], #10 Exhibit Ex. I [Feb. 2, 2022 ADCRR response], #11 Exhibit Ex. J [Feb. 6, 2022 appeal])(BAC)
|
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 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.
