Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
David Shinn, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry v. David Martinez Ramirez
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 10-99023
Before the decision, about 2.7× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a state or local-government petitioner and a Ninth Circuit decision below.
Question presented
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e) (2), precludes a federal court from considering evidence outside the state-court record when reviewing the merits of a claim for habeas relief if a prisoner or his attorney has failed to diligently develop the claim's factual basis in state court, subject to only two statutory exceptions not applicable here. In the cases below, the Ninth Circuit concluded that AEDPA's bar on evidentiary development does not apply to a federal court's merits review of a claim when a court excuses that claim's procedural default under Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012), because the default was caused by postconviction counsel's negligence. The question presented, which drew an eight-judge dissent from the denial of en banc rehearing in each case, is: Does application of the equitable rule this Court announced in Martinez v. Ryan render 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2) inapplicable to a federal court's merits review of a claim for habeas relief?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Brunn Wall Roysden III
Office of the Attorney General
For respondent
Robert Mark Loeb
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage · 12 merits
(3 supporting pet./neither, 9 respondent)
Argument & decision
Argued December 8, 2021 — Brunn W. Roysden · Robert M. Loeb. Audio and transcript
Decided May 23, 2022. Opinion by Thomas.
Proceedings
- Jan 12 2023Record returned to U.S.D.C. District of Arizona (one box of state court records from the Arizona Supreme Court containing 41 documents and one sealed envelope)
- Jun 29 2022JUDGMENT ISSUED
- Jun 27 2022Motion of respondents to modify opinion issued on May 23, 2022 DENIED.
- Jun 21 2022Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/23/2022.
- Jun 13 2022Response to motion to modify opinion filed by petitioner.
- Jun 03 2022Motion to modify opinion filed by respondents.
- May 23 2022Judgment REVERSED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer and Kagan, JJ., joined.
- Dec 08 2021Argued. For petitioner: Brunn W. Roysden, III, Solicitor General, Phoenix, Ariz. For respondents: Robert M. Loeb, Washington, D. C.
- Nov 03 2021The record from the U.S.D.C. District of Arizona is electronic and located on Pacer. Also sent is one box of state court records from the Arizona Supreme Court containing 41 documents and one Sealed envelope.
- Oct 26 2021ARGUMENT RESCHEDULED FOR Wednesday, December 8, 2021
- Oct 22 2021REMOVED from the November 2021 ARGUMENT CALENDAR for rescheduling.
- Oct 14 2021The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.
- Oct 13 2021Reply of petitioners David Shinn, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 21 2021CIRCULATED
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of The Arizona Justice Project and Robert Bartels filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Habeas Scholars Lee Kovarsky, Valena Beety, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Former State Supreme Court Justices and Former Federal Judges filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amicus curiae of The Innocence Network filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Habeas Scholars filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Bipartisan Former Department of Justice Officials and Former Federal Prosecutors filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Federal Defender Capital Habeas Units filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 20 2021Brief amici curiae of Arizona Capital Representation Project, et al. filed (to be recovered). (Distributed). Recovered brief distributed 10/26/21.
- Sep 13 2021Brief of respondents David Martinez Ramirez & Barry Lee Jones filed.
- Sep 01 2021Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.
- Aug 16 2021ARGUMENT SET FOR Monday, November 1, 2021.
- Jul 23 2021Application (21A6) granted by Justice Kagan to file the response and reply briefs on the merits in excess of the word limits.
- Jul 22 2021Brief amici curiae of Jonathan F. Mitchell and Adam K. Mortara filed.
- Jul 22 2021Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, et al. filed.
- Jul 22 2021Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed.
- Jul 15 2021Brief of petitioners David Shinn, et al. filed.
- Jul 15 2021Joint appendix filed. (Statement of cost received)
- Jul 14 2021Application (21A6) to file the response and reply briefs on the merits in excess of the word limits, submitted to Justice Kagan.
- Jun 10 2021Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, David Shinn, et al.
- Jun 10 2021Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, David Martinez Ramirez
- Jun 08 2021The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 15, 2021. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 13, 2021.
- May 25 2021Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
- May 17 2021Petition GRANTED.
- May 10 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.
- Apr 16 2021Reply of petitioners David Shinn, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 14 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.
- Mar 29 2021Brief of respondent David Martinez Ramirez in opposition filed.
- Feb 26 2021Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, and Utah filed.
- Feb 18 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 29, 2021.
- Feb 17 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 26, 2021 to March 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 20 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 26, 2021)