Douglas Edward Gretzler v. Terry L. Stewart, Dir. of the Arizona Dep't of Corr., 146 F.3d 675 (9th Cir. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Douglas Edward Gretzler v. Terry L. Stewart, Dir. of the Arizona Dep't of Corr., 146 F.3d 675 (9th Cir. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Seumanu (cal, 2015-08-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Seumanu
Cal. · 2015 · confidence medium
(See Glossip v. Gross, supra, 576 U.S. at p._[ 135 S.Ct. at p. 2769 ] (dis. opn. of Breyer, J., joined by Ginsburg, J.) [“lengthy delays both aggravate the cruelty of the death penalty and undermine its jurisprudential rationale”].) Lackey claims are usually denied in the lower federal courts, sometimes on the merits (see, e.g., Smith v. Mahoney (9th Cir. 2010) 611 F.3d 978, 998 ; Thompson v. Secretary for Dept. of Corrections (11th Cir. 2008) 517 F.3d 1279, 1284 ), and sometimes on procedural grounds (e.g., Ibarra v. Thaler (5th Cir. 2012) 687 F.3d 222 , 224-225 & fn. 1), although not all…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Creech v. State (2×)
Idaho · 2002 · confidence medium
The State argues Creech could have raised this claim in his prior petition, citing three federal cases in support: Gretzler v. Stewart, 146 F.3d 675, 676 (9th Cir.1998); Bonin v. Calderon, 77 F.3d 1155, 1160-61 (9th Cir.1996); Turner v. Jabe, 58 F.3d 924, 930-31 (4th Cir.1995).
discussed Cited "see" Winkler v. Smith
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gretzler v. Stewart, 146 F.3d 675, 675 (9th Cir.1998) (describing Martinez-Villa-real as “recognizing exception to AEDPA for claim that could not have been adjudicated in prior habeas petition”) (emphasis added).
cited Cited "see" McKinney v. State
Idaho · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gretzler v. Stewart, 146 F.3d 675, 676 (9th Cir.1998); Bonin v. Calderon, 77 F.3d 1155, 1160-61 (9th Cir.1996); Turner v. Jabe, 58 F.3d 924, 930-31 (4th Cir.1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Douglas Edward GRETZLER, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Terry L. STEWART, Director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, Et Al., Respondents-Appellees
98-80394, 98-99019.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jun 3, 1998.
146 F.3d 675
Cary Sandman, Waterfall, Economidis, Caldwell, Hanshaw & Villamana, P.C., Tucson, Arizona, for the petitioner-appellant., Paul J. McMurdie, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals Section for the State of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, for the respondents-appel-lees.
Schroeder, Farris, Pregerson.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published
Reporter's Syllabus — editorial summary, not part of the Court's opinion

Cary Sandman, Waterfall, Economidis, Caldwell, Hanshaw & Villamana, P.C., Tucson, Arizona, for the petitioner-appellant.

Paul J. McMurdie, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals Section for the State of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, for the respondents-appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; Richard M. Bilby, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CIV-98-271-TUC-RMB.

Before: SCHROEDER, FARRIS, and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges.

Lead Opinion

Order; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON.

Douglas Edward Gretzler seeks to appeal the district court’s denial of his second petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and the denial of his application for stay of his execution scheduled for 3:00 p.m., Wednesday, June 3, 1998. We grant his motion for a Certificate of Appealability and deny the remaining motions as moot. The facts and procedural background are set forth in our disposition of the first petition. See Gretzler v. Stewart, 112 F.3d 992, (9th Cir.1997).

Gretzler here claims that his execution would be cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution because he has been on death row since 1975 and his execution would no longer serve any deterrent or retributive purpose. His claim is similar to the one we rejected in Ceja v. Stewart, 134 F.3d 1368 (9th Cir.1998), as barred by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). In addition, Gretzler’s prior § 2254 petition was amended[*676] in 1992. Gretzler could have included this claim in that petition, when he had already been on death row 17 years. See Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1618, 140 L.Ed.2d 849 (1998) (recognizing exception to AEDPA for claim that could not have been adjudicated in prior habeas petition). See also Lackey v. Texas, 514 U.S. 1045, 115 S.Ct. 1421, 131 L.Ed.2d 304 (1995) (Stevens, J. dissenting from denial of certio-rari) where petitioner had been on death row 17 years. Although Gretzler contends that his claim was not ripe until his death warrant was signed, his case is unlike Martinez-Villareal. There the competency claim could not have been evaluated until execution was imminent. Here, Gretzler challenges his death sentence in light of the years on death row he has already served.

The district court’s order dismissing the petition and denying the stay of execution is AFFIRMED.

Dissent

PREGERSON, Circuit Judge,

dissenting,

I would grant the stay and remand to the district court to consider the merits of the petition. See Martinez-Villareal — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1618, 140 L.Ed.2d 849 (1998).