Summary
This Sixth Circuit order denies a prisoner's motion to stay the mandate pending his petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. Judge Thapar explains that under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, the movant must demonstrate good cause, including a reasonable probability of success on the merits and irreparable harm. Because the petitioner explicitly acknowledged that he faces no imminent execution during the pendency of his cert petition, he failed to show the required irreparable injury. Consequently, the court denied the motion without reaching the merits prong.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether White satisfied the three‑prong test for a stay of the mandate under Fed. R. App. P. 41.
- Whether White demonstrated irreparable harm sufficient to justify a stay.
Holdings
- The motion to stay the mandate is denied because White failed to show irreparable harm.
Key quotations
“The movant must show that [his] petition [for certiorari] would present a substantial question and that there is good cause for a stay.” (579)
“The test for stays under Rule 41 mirrors the Supreme Court’s own test for granting stays pending the filing of a petition for certiorari: the movant must show (1) a reasonable probability that four Justices will consider the issue sufficiently meritorious to grant certiorari; (2) a fair prospect that a majority of the Court will vote to reverse the judgment below; and (3) a likelihood that irreparable harm will result from the denial of a stay.” (579)
Factual background
Karu Gene White, a death‑row inmate, argued that he faced no irreparable harm if the mandate were not stayed because he claimed a pending state‑court action exempted him from execution, an injunction against Kentucky's lethal‑injection protocol remained in effect, and certain Kentucky execution procedures were unconstitutional.
Procedural history
The district court entered judgment in a death‑penalty case. White appealed and then filed a motion under Fed. R. App. P. 41 to stay the mandate while his petition for certiorari is pending. The Sixth Circuit considered the motion.