IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Petitioners, Real Parties in Interest.

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Decision Filed Mar. 5, 2014 ED PRIETO; COUNTY OF YOLO,

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No John Teixeira; et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants,

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DOTCONNECTAFRICA TRUST,

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No TODD S. GLASSEY AND MICHAEL E. MCNEIL,

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Case 3:13-cv SC Document 39 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 5

Case: Document: 6 Filed: 11/03/2016 Pages: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No

Case 5:08-cv RMW Document 7 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 1 of 7

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs - Appellants, Defendants - Appellees.

Nos and IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 08/27/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 126-1, Page 1 of 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 11/17/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 36, Page 1 of 12 No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Appeal No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Bradley Berentson, et al. Brian Perryman,

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Case5:12-cv HRL Document9 Filed08/09/12 Page1 of 5

No No CV LRS

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case: , 01/02/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 43-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NOS , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNDER SEAL, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

Case No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit DAVID JOHN SLATER, WILDLIFE PERSONALITIES, LTD.,

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SECOND APPELLATE DISTRlCT, DIVISION TWO. Petitioners and Appellants, Respondent and Appellee,

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: , 12/15/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 51-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DAVID GENTRY, JAMES PARKER, MARK MID LAM, JAMES BASS, and CALGUNS SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In the Supreme Court of the State of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case: Document: 15 Filed: 07/06/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: July 06, 2016

Case M:06-cv VRW Document 424 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. DIVISION [Number]

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE

Case: , 05/19/2016, ID: , DktEntry: 33-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case: , 08/14/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 46-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 04/24/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 23-1, Page 1 of 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TO BE FILED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT DEFEENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

HAROLD P. STURGEON, Plaintiff and Petitioner, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Defendants and Respondents, and

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 34 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION [NUMBER]

Case: , 12/29/2014, ID: , DktEntry: 20-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Citation to New Authority (Vetoed Legislation)

1900 M Street, NW, Ste. 250, Washington, D.C

JOHN TEIXEIRA, et al., Appellants, vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al., Appellees. Northern District of California REHEARING EN BANG

Case: /16/2014 ID: DktEntry: 37-1 Page: 1 of 4 (1 of 9) NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:12-cv SVW-PLA Document 21 Filed 05/24/12 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:204

Case4:10-cv CW Document205 Filed11/02/12 Page1 of 6

Case: , 07/31/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 60-1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: Document: 16 Filed: 12/02/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: December 02, 2016

Case: , 07/03/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 12-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR MAY 7, 2014 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No. S IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA. KRISTIN M. PERRY et ai., Plaintiffs and Respondents,

PARKER, et al., THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., STIPULATION FOR SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF PURSUANT TO RULES OF COURT, RULE 8.

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 15 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

Office of the Clerk United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Post Office Box San Francisco, California

In the Supreme Court of the United States

Case: Document: 26-1 Filed: 12/04/2014 Pages: 6 NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) )

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. REBECCA FRIEDRICHS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO

Nos and UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

This matter came on regularly before this Court for hearings on October 7,2004 and on April

Case4:11-cv PJH Document65 Filed08/31/12 Page1 of 8

[Dist Ct. No.: 3:12-CV WHO] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. JOHN TEIXEIRA; et al., Plaintiffs - Appellants, vs.

Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. v. Funambol, Inc. Doc. 52

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:09-cv CAS-MAN Document 107 Filed 05/07/10 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:1464 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,_. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Third Circuit Civil Appeals: Motions

PlainSite. Legal Document

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEVEN MCARDLE, vs. AT&T MOBILITY LLC, et al.,

STIPULATION FOR JOINT APPENDIX. KAMALA D. HARRIs Attorney General of California. DOUGLAS J. WOODS Senior Assistant Attorney General

Case 3:16-md VC Document 2391 Filed 12/31/18 Page 1 of 5

COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION 2. CALGUNS FOUNDATION INC., et al v. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

CACJ CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Case: /27/2013 ID: DktEntry: 19 Page: 1 of 34 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT C.A. NO.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT IN RE TELES AG,

Case: , 03/16/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 46-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 4:08-cv JSW Document 767 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 7

Case: , 03/23/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 38-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY ROCKARD J. DELGADILLO CITY ATTORNEY REPORT RE: COURT RULING

Case4:13-cv JSW Document112 Filed05/05/14 Page1 of 3

Pakootas, Donald R. Michel, and State of Washington,

Case 3:15-cv WHA Document 35 Filed 04/22/16 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 3:14-cv L-NLS Document 60 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 3

Case: , 08/16/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 28-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8

Case No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. AMERICARE MEDSERVICES, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, vs.

Transcription:

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 1 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 10-72977 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al., v. Petitioners, D.C. No. 5-6-cv-219-JF-HRL DEATH PENALTY CASE UNITED STATES DISRICT COURT for the NORTHERN DISTRICT of CALIFORNIA Respondents, MICHAEL MORALES and ALBERT GREENWOOD BROWN, Real Parties in Interest. USDC No. 5:06-cv-00219-JF-HRL Honorable Jeremy Fogel MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California ROCHELLE C. EAST THOMAS S. PATTERSON Supervising Deputy Attorney General RONALD S. MATTHIAS State Bar No. 104684 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 703-5858 Fax: (415) 703-1234 Email: Ronald.Matthias@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Petitioners

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 2 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS In light of the Order of the Supreme Court of California issued today in California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al. v. Superior Court County of Marin, CSC No. S186751 (copy attached), no execution of Albert Greenwood Brown can occur on September 30, 2010, as a matter of state law. Accordingly, the mandamus proceedings initiated in this Court to vacate the Order of the District Court in Morale s, et al. v. Cate, et al., N.D. Cal. No. 06-926 JF HRL, will, upon expiration of the warrant and associated reprieve, be moot. Under these circumstances, petitioners respectfully move this Court to dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. 1

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 3 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 Dated: September 29, 2010 Respectfully Submitted, EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California ROCHELLE C. EAST THOMAS S. PATTERSON Supervising Deputy Attorney General s/ Ronald S. Matthias RONALD S. MATTHIAS State Attorneys for Defendants and Appellees 2

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 4 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 10- IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al., v. Petitioners, D.C. No. 5-6-cv-219-JF-HRL DEATH PENALTY CASE UNITED STATES DISRICT COURT for the Northern District of California Respondents, MICHAEL MORALES and ALBERT GREENWOOD BROWN, Real Parties in Interest. STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES To the best of our knowledge, there are no related cases. Dated: September 28, 2010 Respectfully Submitted, EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California ROCHELLE C. EAST THOMAS S. PATTERSON Supervising Deputy Attorney General s/ Ronald S. Matthias RONALD S. MATTHIAS Attorneys for Defendants and Appellees 3

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 5 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PURSUANT TO FED.R.APP.P 32(a)(7)(C) AND CIRCUIT RULE 32-1 FOR 05-99014 I certify that: (check (x) appropriate option(s)) 1. Pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 32(a)(7)(C) and Ninth Circuit Rule 32-1, the attached opening/answering/reply/cross-appeal brief is Proportionately spaced, has a typeface of 14 points or more and contains words (opening, answering and the second and third briefs filed in cross-appeals must not exceed 14,000 words; reply briefs must not exceed 7,000 words Monospaced, has 10.5 or fewer characters per inch and contains words or lines of text (opening, answering, and the second and third briefs filed in cross-appeals must not exceed 14,000 words or 1,300 lines of text; reply briefs must not exceed 7,000 words or 650 lines of text). 2. The attached brief is not subject to the type-volume limitations of Fed.R.App.P. 32(a(7)(B) because or X This brief complies with Fed.R.App.P 32(a)(1)-(7) and is a principal brief of no more than 30 pages or a reply brief of no more than 15 pages. This brief complies with a page or size-volume limitation established by separate court order dated and is Proportionately spaced, has a typeface of 14 points or more and contains words, Monospaced, has 10.5 or fewer characters per inch and contains pages or words or lines of text. 3. Briefs in Capital Cases. This brief is being filed in a capital case pursuant to the type-volume limitations set forth at Circuit Rule 32-4 and is X Proportionately spaced, has a typeface of 14 points or more and contains 119 words (opening, answering and the second and third briefs filed in cross-appeals must not exceed 21,000 words; reply briefs must not exceed 9,800 words). Monospaced, has 10.5 or fewer characters per inch and contains words or lines of text (opening, answering, and the second and third briefs filed in cross-appeals must not exceed 75 pages or 1,950 lines of text; reply briefs must not exceed 35 pages or 910 lines of text). 4

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 6 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 4. Amicus Briefs. Pursuant to Fed.R.App.P 29(d) and 9th Cir.R. 32-1, the attached amicus brief is proportionally spaced, has a typeface of 14 points or more and contains 7,000 words or less, Monospaced, has 10.5 or few characters per inch and contains not more than either 7,000 words or 650 lines of text, Not subject to the type-volume limitations because it is an amicus brief of no more than 15 pages and complies with Fed.R.App.P. 32 (a)(1)(5). 9/29/10 s/ Ronald S. Matthias Dated Ronald S. Matthias 5

Case: 10-72977 09/29/2010 Page: 7 of 7 ID: 7491582 DktEntry: 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Case Name: Morales and Sims v. CDC, et al. No. 10-72977 I hereby certify that on September 29, 2010, I electronically filed the following documents with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system: MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the CM/ECF system. I further certify that some of the participants in the case are not registered CM/ECF users. On September 29, 2010, I have mailed the foregoing document(s) by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within three (3) calendar days to the following non-cm/ecf participants: David A. Senior, Esq. McBREEN & SENIOR 2029 Century Park East, Third Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Attorney for Michael Morales and Albert Brown Richard P. Steinken Pro Hac Vice Jenner & Block, LLP 353 N. Clark Street Chicago, IL 60654 Attorney for Michael Morales and Albert Brown I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on September 29, 2010, at San Francisco, California. M.M. Argarin Declarant s/ M.M. Argarin Signature 40466473.doc