''Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal'', 523 U.S. 637 (1998), was a decision by the

United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...

, which held that did not apply to a petition that raises only a competency to be executed claim and that respondent did not, therefore, need authorization to file his petition in the District Court.

Factual Background

Martinez-Villareal (Respondent), filed a habeas corpus petition in federal court. Relying on ''

Ford v. Wainwright ''Ford v. Wainwright'', 477 U.S. 399 (1986), was a Lists of United States Supreme Court cases, landmark Supreme Court of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the common law rule that the insane cannot be Capital punishment in the ...

'', which held that the State may not execute an insane person, the Respondent alleged that he was incompetent to be executed. The State moved to dismiss the Respondents petition as premature and the District Court agreed. Nevertheless, the court granted

habeas corpus ''Habeas corpus'' (; from Medieval Latin, ) is a recourse in law through which a person can report an unlawful detention or imprisonment to a court and request that the court order the custodian of the person, usually a prison official, t ...

on other grounds. The District Court's grant was reversed on appeal, but warned that the Respondent's ''Ford'' claim could be brought again. Fearing the passage of the

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), , was introduced to the United States Congress in April 1995 as a Senate Bill (). The bill was passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress in response to the bombings of th ...

(AEDPA) might foreclose his ''Ford'' claim, Respondent asked the District Court to reopen his ''Ford'' claim. The District Court denied the Respondent's request, but assured that the ''Ford'' claim would not be foreclosed in future habeas corpus petitions. Thereafter, the State obtained a warrant for execution of the Respondent. The Arizona Superior Court determined that the Respondent was fit to be executed. Respondent appealed the determination to the State Supreme Court, but the court declined to review the finding. Respondent moved to reopen his ''Ford'' claim in Federal District Court, however, the court dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction according to AEDPA. Respondent appealed the dismissal to the Federal

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is the U.S. federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: * District o ...

. The Court of Appeals found that the claim was not barred and transferred it back to the District Court. The Supreme Court granted ''certiorari.''

References

External links

* United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court 1998 in United States case law {{SCOTUS-case-stub

Factual Background

See also

References

External links