Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF MISSOURI,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
NO. SC84648
On March 26, 2015, this Court entered its order setting Mr. Edwards
Both counsel serve by appointment of the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
3.
Counsel conferred this date regarding the work to be completed before the
scheduled execution.
necessary clemency tasks up to this point but continue to work on the clemency
investigation, investigating possible Ford claims, as well as continuing the litigation
related to the lethal injection procedures used by the State of Missouri (Zink v. Lombardi,
Mr. Weis is counsel of record for defendant Daniel Rascon Frias, United
States v. Jose Ramirez, et. al., Case No. 12-cr-00379-HFS. Mr. Frias has been in-custody
since December 19, 2012, and his jury trial has been scheduled to begin on May 4, 2015.
(Exhibit B). The trial of this federal drug conspiracy is expected to last two weeks and
would encompass the scheduled execution set for Mr. Edwards. The lead defendant in
this matter, Jose Luis Ramirez, is also in-custody and will be proceeding to trial on May
4, 2015, as well.
6.
The timing of the conflicts for counsel could not have been anticipated and,
in the case of the federal jury trial, has been set for several months. Counsel would be
unable to devote the necessary time to the outstanding work to be completed in support
of Mr. Edwards clemency petition because of the preparation and time investment
necessary to prepare for the hearing and trial.
2
process. Young v. Hayes, 218 F.3d 850, 853 (8th Cir. 2000). The assistance of counsel is a
necessary component of the due process protection. Further, Mr. Edwards is entitled to
counsel to pursue proceedings designed to stay or prevent his execution. See 18 U.S.C.
3006A and 18 U.S.C. 3599; see also McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994).
This Court has recognized the importance of counsel during the clemency process when
it correctly stayed the execution of Leon Taylor when his counsel had similar scheduling
issues. This Court ultimately re-set Mr. Taylors execution two months later allowing his
counsel adequate time to prepare the essential clemency materials.
8.
all of their respective clients while providing Mr. Edwards with the due process
protections to which he is entitled. Failure to re-set the execution date would result in an
unnecessary delay of a trial for a federal defendant incarcerated pre-trial for 828 days and
a further delay of an evidentiary hearing for another Missouri death row prisoner.
WHEREFORE, for all the foregoing reasons, appellant respectfully moves the
Court to re-set his execution date.
Respectfully submitted,
7.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 26th day of March, 2015, I filed this Motion to Stay
Execution via the Courts electronic case filing system.