Stanley v. Chappell, No. 13-15987 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CasePetitioner challenged the state court's holding that a retrospective competency determination was feasible and that he was competent at the time of his penalty-phase trial. The district court concluded that exhaustion of state remedies was a prerequisite to its review of petitioner's challenge and the district court stayed and held in abeyance petitioner's challenge pending exhaustion in state court. Petitioner appealed. The court concluded that the stay-and-abeyance order was not an appealable collateral order and was not appealable under Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp. as an order that put petitioner "effectively out of court." The court declined to construe the appeal as a petition for a writ of mandamus. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Court Description: Habeas Corpus / Death Penalty. The panel dismissed for lack of jurisdiction a capital prisoner’s appeal from the district court’s order staying and holding in abeyance his federal habeas corpus proceeding pending exhaustion in state court of his challenge to state court holdings that a retrospective competency determination was feasible and that the petitioner was competent at the time of his penalty-phase trial. The panel held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction because the district court’s stay-and-abeyance order was not an appealable collateral order and was not appealable under Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp. as an order that put the petitioner effectively out of court. The panel declined to construe the appeal as a petition for a writ of mandamus.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.