Miles, et al v. Stewart

Petitioner: Kevin Artice Miles
Respondent: Charles L Ryan
Case Number: 4:2001cv00645
Filed: December 11, 2001
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pinal
Presiding Judge: Raner C Collins
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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
November 5, 2013 93 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 92 Motion Renewed Motion for Authorization of Federal Habeas Counsel to Appear in State Court Litigation. Federally-appointed counsel is authorized to represent Petitioner in state court for the purpose of seeking state post-conviction relief under Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. Signed by Chief Judge Raner C Collins on 11/5/13.(SMBE)

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: Miles, et al v. Stewart
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Kevin Artice Miles
Represented By: Timothy Michael Gabrielsen
Represented By: Jon M Sands
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: Charles L Ryan
Represented By: Jonathan William Bass
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?