A Writ of Habeas Corpus is a legal motion which is filed most frequently to ensure that a Defendant's imprisonment or detention is not illegal under the Constitution. It is sometimes used to test the legalities of an arrest or a commitment.
Attorney Thomas A. Gorman will first exhaust all available appeal remedies before seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Contact him today to learn more about this procedure at a free initial consultation.
Sedona Criminal Defense Lawyer Skilled at Petitioning for Writs of Habeas Corpus
Thomas A. Gorman practices in the ninth circuit Court of Appeals and the federal district court as well as all Arizona state courts. All convictions and sentencing of a citizen or a non-citizen must meet requirements of the United States Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. Every state must respect these fundamental rights of citizens, and when these rights have been violated, there exists grounds to file a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.
Habeas corpus in the United States
Habeas corpus /ˈheɪbiəs ˈkɔrpəs/, Latin for "you [shall] have the body," is the name of a legal action or writ by means of which detainees (or condemned inmates) can seek relief from unlawful imprisonment or stay a pending execution. Any state prison inmate who was convicted and sentenced in state court in violation of the United States constitution has a basis to file a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus in federal court and seek a reversal of his conviction, sentence or other relief. The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." United States law affords persons the right to petition the federal courts for a writ of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus petitions are a civil proceeding and the government (state or federal) is usually ordered by the court to respond to the litigants petition. Individual states also afford persons the ability to petition their own state court systems for habeas corpus pursuant to their respective constitutions and laws when held or sentenced by state authorities. Federal habeas review did not extend to those in state custody until almost a century after the nation's founding. During the Civil War and Reconstruction, as later during the War on Terrorism, the right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus was substantially curtailed for persons accused of engaging in certain conduct. In reaction to the former, and to ensure state courts enforced federal law, a Reconstruction Act for the first time extended the right of federal court habeas review to those in the custody of state courts (prisons and jails), very greatly expanding the writ essentially to all imprisoned on American soil for the first time. The federal habeas statute that resulted, with substantial amendments, is now at 28 U.S.C. § 2241. For many decades now, the great majority of habeas petitions reviewed in federal court have been filed by those imprisoned in state prisons by state courts for state crimes (e.g., murder, rape, robbery, etc.), since in the American system crime has historically been a matter of state law. Thus, habeas is a very interesting area for the relationship between federal and state courts and systems of laws, within the study of federalism.
Attorney Gorman will evaluate your case by exhaustively dissecting your case and the record for evidence and grounds sufficient to file a habeas corpus petition, including:
- If the conviction was based on illegally obtained evidence
- The habeas petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel
- Whether the jury was improperly selected and impaneled
Although there is no guarantee that a petition for habeas corpus will be successful, Thomas A. Gorman has had a number of these actions granted such as in Petition (9th Circuit Order and District Court Order) involving Mikal Omar Rasul, Petitioner v. Janet Napolitano; Terry L. Stewart, Director; David Cluff, Respondents, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 2004-15937, D.C. No. CV-01 -001 129-DCB.Rasul Mackell; and Robert Stanley Paige, Petitioner vs. Dora B. Schriro, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, CV 07-8089-PCT-EHC ( see attached). The United States District Court Magistrate recommended granting Lawyer Gorman's Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus.( see attached). The Honorable Earl Carroll, United States District Court judge granted the Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus.(see attached).
Additionally, if Thomas A. Gorman uncovers a fundamental miscarriage of justice he will file a habeas corpus petition and seek a new trial. He is also experienced with cases of actual innocence and having these convictions overturned. To read more about the cases he has handled in his over 25 years of criminal defense practice see the representative cases page.
Contact a Flagstaff Appellate Lawyer Today
Contact him today to discuss your needs.
