IN RE: Kermit ALEXANDER; Bradley Winchell (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

IN RE: Kermit ALEXANDER; Bradley Winchell, Kermit Alexander; Bradley Winchell, Movants-Petitioners, v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco, Respondent, Michael Angelo Morales; Tiequon Aundray Cox; Albert Greenwood Brown; Mitchell Carlton Sims; David A. Raley; Robert G. Fairbank; Kevin Cooper; Scott Lynn Pinholster; William Charles Payton; Royal Hayes; Richard Delmer Boyer; Ronald Lee Deere; Harvey Lee Heishman III; Anthony J. Sully; Albert Cunningham; Douglas S Mickey; Hector Juan Ayala; Richard Gonzales Samayoa; Raynard Paul Cummings; Conrad Zapien; Ronaldo Ayala; John Louis Visciotti, Plaintiffs-Real Parties in Interest, Ralph M. Diaz, Acting Secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation; Ronald Davis, Warden, Warden of San Quentin Prison; Gavin Newsom, Governor of the State of California, Defendants-Real Parties in Interest.

No. 19-70232

Decided: September 16, 2021

Before: W. FLETCHER, FORREST **, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Kent S. Scheidegger, Legal Director, Kymberlee Claire Stapleton, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, Sacramento, CA, for Movants - Petitioners. Sara M. Cohbra, Law Office of Sara Cohbra, PC, Cheltenham, PA, K. Elizabeth Dahlstrom, Deputy Federal Public Defender, FPDCA - Federal Public Defender's Office (Los Angeles), Jean M. Doherty, Associate Chief Counsel, Kate T. Spelman, Attorney, Jenner & Block, LLP, David Senior, Ann-Kathryn Tria, Attorney, McBreen & Senior, Los Angeles, CA, John R. Grele, Attorney, Law Office of John R Grele, San Francisco, CA, Kelly Morrison, Jenner & Block, LLP, Washington, DC, Richard Paul Steinken, Jenner & Block, LLP, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest Michael Angelo Morales, Tiequon Aundray Cox, Albert Greenwood Brown. Susan Garvey, Esquire, Cliona R. Plunkett, Attorney, Habeas Corpus Resource Center, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest Mitchell Carlton Sims. Mark Raymond Drozdowski, Esquire, Federal Public Defender, FPDCA - Federal Public Defender's Office (Los Angeles), Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest David A. Raley, Robert G. Fairbank. Norman C. Hile, Attorney, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest Kevin Cooper. Sean Kevin Kennedy, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest, Scott Lynn Pinholster. Susel Carrillo-Orellana, Michael Parente, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA - Federal Public Defender's Office (Los Angeles), Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest William Charles Payton, Royal Hayes, Richard Delmer Boyer, Ronald Lee Deere, Harvey Lee Heishman III, Anthony J. Sully, Albert Cunningham, Douglas S Mickey, Hector Juan Ayala, Richard Gonzales Samayoa, Raynard Paul Cummings. Statia Peakheart, Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff - Real Party in Interest Raynard Paul Cummings, Conrad Zapien, Ronaldo Ayala, John Louis Visciotti. R. Lawrence Bragg, Esquire, Steven M. Gevercer, Misha Igra, Esquire, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Joanna Breiden Hood, Aseil H. Mohmoud, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Jay M. Goldman, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Michael James Quinn, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA - Office of the California Attorney General, Marisa Yee Kirschenbauer, Attorney General, Thomas S. Patterson, Esquire, Supervisory Attorney, California Department of Justice, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant - Real Party in Interest Ralph M. Diaz, Ronald Davis, Gavin Newsom.

ORDER

Petitioners, who are family members of the victims of plaintiffs Michael Morales and Tiequon Cox, ask this court for a writ of mandate or prohibition. Petitioners sought an order requiring the district court to (1) vacate all stays of execution; (2) conditionally refrain from issuing further stays or injunctions of executions or preparations; and (3) include in any future stay order an expiration period of 90 days. After Petitioners filed their petition in this court, Governor Gavin Newsom issued an Executive Order imposing a moratorium on all executions, repealing California's lethal-injection regulations, and closing the death chambers. In light of the Executive Order, all Plaintiffs and all Defendants filed a stipulated dismissal in the district court. Thereafter, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Petitioner's mandamus petition.¹ (Dkt. No. 41). Petitioners do not oppose this motion.

We therefore GRANT the motion to DISMISS this petition. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees. The petition is DISMISSED.

FOOTNOTES

1. Before filing their motion to dismiss, Defendants filed a request for judicial notice regarding their answer to Petitioner's writ of mandamus. (Dkt. No. 17). Because we dismiss Petitioners’ appeal as moot, we need not rule on the request for judicial notice.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law