|
|
In Re Blodgett, 502 U.S. 236 (1992)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
In Re Blodgett, 502 U.S. 236 (1992)
In re Blodgett No. 91-716 Decided Jan. 13, 1992 502 U.S. 236
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Syllabus
Charles Campbell was convicted in Washington state court of multiple murders in 1982. After his second federal habeas petition was filed and denied by the District Court in March, 1969, the Court of Appeals granted an indefinite stay of execution. The case was argued and submitted to the Court of Appeals in June, 1989, but no decision has been announced, and the stay remains in effect. In 1990, the State Attorney General twice wrote letters to the court inquiring about the status of the case, but they went unanswered. In February, 1991, the court vacated the submission of the case pending the outcome of Campbell’s third state action for collateral relief. After that relief was denied, Campbell advised the court that he intended to file a third federal habeas petition. In August, 1991, over two years after the case was submitted, the panel directed him to file the third petition and announced its intention to wait for the District Court’s ruling on it before taking further action. The Washington Attorney General filed this mandamus petition.
Held: This Court declines to issue mandamus to the Court of Appeals at this time. The grant of a stay of execution directed to a State by a federal court imposes on that court the concomitant duty to take all steps necessary to ensure a prompt resolution of the matter, and the State has sustained severe prejudice by the 2 1/2-year stay of execution. Nonetheless, as a predicate for extraordinary relief, the State should have asked the Court of Appeals to vacate or modify its August, 1991, order before coming to this Court. The Court of Appeals should determine how best to expedite the appeal, given the present posture of the case. Denial of the writ is without prejudice to the State’s right to again seek mandamus or other extraordinary relief if unnecessary delays or unwarranted stays occur in the panel’s disposition of the matter.
Mandamus denied.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," In Re Blodgett, 502 U.S. 236 (1992) in 502 U.S. 236 Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=G2YKHEBKGMK2HP4.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." In Re Blodgett, 502 U.S. 236 (1992), in 502 U.S. 236, Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=G2YKHEBKGMK2HP4.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in In Re Blodgett, 502 U.S. 236 (1992). cited in 1992, 502 U.S. 236. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=G2YKHEBKGMK2HP4.
|