Sanders v. White
Petitioner: David Lee Sanders
Respondent: Randy White
Case Number: 5:2003cv00455
Filed: October 20, 2003
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Lexington Office
County: Lyon
Presiding Judge: Amul R. Thapar
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 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
May 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 159 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Sanders' 151 Motion for Certificate of Appealability is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is granted as to: (1) Claim 18; (2) Claim 27(F), specifically as whether the Kentucky Supreme Court unreasona bly applied Strickland; and (3) Claim 36, specifically as to whether Sanders suffered cumulative prejudice from the deficiencies alleged in Claims 27(F) and 27(I). The motion is otherwise denied. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 5/16/2017. (STC)cc: COR,6CCA
June 21, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 150 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) Sanders' petition for a writ of habeas corpus with respect to Claim 27(I) is DENIED. (2) Sanders' motion to alter or amend judgment with respect to Claim 27(I), 115 , is DENIED. (3) Sanders' application for a certificate of appealability with respect to Claim 27(I), 116 , is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 6/21/2016.(STC)cc: COR
July 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 128 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: (1) Sanders' motion for reconsideration under FRCP 59(e), 115 , is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (2) Court's previous judgment, 114 , is VACATED as it applies to resolution of Claim 27(I). (3) By 8/17/ 2015, Sanders SHALL FILE sworn affidavits from witnesses identified in Claim 27(I), detailing mitigation testimony they would have provided during penalty phase. By 8/17/2015, Sanders also SHALL FILE a brief explaining relevance of affidavits to his cause-and-prejudice argument; (4) By 9/8/2015, Warden SHALL RESPOND to both affidavits and Sanders' brief. (5) By 9/22/2015, Sanders may file a reply. (6) If affidavits demonstrate need for an evidentiary hearing on Sanders' cause-and-preju dice argument, Court will inform parties. If Sanders establishes cause and prejudice for his procedural default on Claim 27(I), Court will set a deadline to file a motion to expand record or hold an evidentiary hearing on merits of that claim. (7) Sanders' motion for a certificate of appealability, 120 , is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 7/15/2015. (STC)cc: COR
February 18, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 113 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: It is ORDERED that Sanders' petition for the writ of habeas corpus, 1 73 , motion for discovery 78 , motion for an evidentiary hearing 79 , motion for funds, [80,] and motion to expand the record 97 are DENIED. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 2/18/2015.(LC)cc: COR, Modified text on 2/18/2015 (LC).
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sanders v. White
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: David Lee Sanders
Represented By: David M. Barron
Represented By: Christopher Nelson Lasch
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: Randy White
Represented By: David M. Barron
Represented By: Christopher Nelson Lasch
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.


Why Is My Information Online?