EXHIBIT 1
No. AP-77,054
IN THE _ Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
RODNEY REED,
Appe]]ant, V .
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Appe]]ee.
On Appeal from the 213t J udicial Distl'ict Court, Bastrop County, TeXaS
AFFIDAVIT OF BRYCE BEN.]ET
BRYCE BENJET
THE INNOCENCE PRO.TECT
40 Worth St.
NeW York, NeW York 10013 (212) 364-5340
(212) 364-5341 (fax)
A_ndrew F. MacRae
State Bar No. 00784510 LEVATINO|PACE LLP
1101 S. Ca,pital of Texas Highway Building K, Suite 125
Austin, Texas 78746
(512) 637-8565
(512) 637-1583 (fax)
Attorneys For Appellant Rodney Reed
County of New York )
State of New York
) )
Bryce Benjet, of lawful age, being duly deposed and sworn, states that:
l.
My name is Bryce Benjet. l am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Texas and counsel of record for Rodney Reed. I am over the age of 18 and otherwise competent to give this affidavit
On January 13, 2014, I sent a letter to the Bastrop County District Attorney, Bryan Goertz, asking for his agreement to conduct comprehensive DNA testing on the evidence collected in the investigation of the murder of Stacey Stites. I provided a detailed explanation of the reasons why this testing could prove innocence and offered to conduct this testing at the expense of the Innocence Project. A true and correct copy of the letter is attached as Appendix A to this Af_fidavit.
Soon thereafter, l spoke with Mr. Goertz, who informed me that he agreed that DNA testing should take place in the interest of justice, but referred me to the Attorney General’s Office to negotiate the details.
I had several conversations with staff from the Attomey General’s Office over the next few months. Frustrated with the slow progress of these negotiations, I suggested We expedite the process by agreeing to the testing of some items on an interim basis While the Attorney General’s Ofiice continued to consider other evidence. A true and correct copy of the e-mail I sent making this offer is attached as Appendix B.
Based on my initial conversation with Bastrop District Attorney, Mr. Goertz, and until the end of April 2014, I had believed that the State was going to agree to conduct DNA testing on all relevant evidence lt was not until the end of April that l learned from Assistant Attorney General Matthew Ottoway that the State was not inclined to agree to test any evidence that did not fit within the Attorney General’s narrow definition of biological material. This would be limited to already identified biological fluids, rape kit samples, and hairs. I was surprised by this position based on my initial conversation with the Bastrop County District Attorney, Mr. Goetz. Mr. Ottoway informed me that no final decision could be
made and that we would have to wait until his supervisor returned from vacation in mid-May. We planned to speak on May 15, 2014, but the Attorney General’s Office asked for more time, as shown in the May 15, 2014 e-mail of which a true and correct copy is attached as Appendix C. The final decision from the Attorney General’s Office limiting the scope of the agreed DNA testing was not announced to me until late May 2014. At this time I was working on the Petition for Writ of Certiorari seeking review from the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, drafting an order reflecting the agreed DNA testing, as well as drafting Reed’S motion for post-conviction DNA testing in advance of a scheduled hearing to set an execution date. '
6. After the State filed its response in opposition to DNA testing, I wrote the trial judge on October 7, 2014 asking that a hearing be seton the merits of DNA testing A true and correct copy of this letter is attached as Appendix D. In advance of that request, I discussed the hearing with Assistant Attomey General ()ttoway. He asked that any hearing that was to be scheduled take place at least a week after his return from a vacation spanning most of the month of 0ctober, and that later in Novernber would be better. I accommodated this request with the understanding that it would not be used by the State against my client.
75?549-W]1SR01A - MSW
7. On Monday, January 26, 2015, l received a CD via Fed Ex from the Attomey General’s Office. On this CD are two audiotaped witness interviews containing information that is helpful to Mr. Reed and requires additional investigation In particular, one interview describes an internal and previously undisclosed investigation of limmy Fennell by the Giddings Police Department, which was known to Nathan Lapham. Mr. Lapham was a witness called by the State during Mr. Reed’s last habeas hearing, but, he did not mention this investigation At the hearing, Mr. Reed’s counsel was expressly precluded from questioning Mr. Lapham more broadly concerning Fennell and the Stites murder.\ The State has previously taken the position that the Giddings Police Department was not involved in the investigation Another interview concerns what may have been an eyewitness account of a heated argument between Fennell and Stites around the time of the murder.
Further affiant sayeth naught.
Bryce Benjet
Subscribed and sworn to, before me, a Notary Public, this 30th day of January 2015 , by Bryce Benj et who is personally known to me or has shown adequate identification:
Notary Public
MADELINE H. deLO“' No£ary Pubtfc, State Ot Nev§ ibrk eni-itt 122353157225 _ _ _ _ or ' _Commtssion Expires Marcl(iki[é?tgo /‘? t
APPENDIX A
Maddy deLone, Esq. Executiva Direetor
j Newvork, Nv10013
Tel 212.364.5340 Fax 212.364.5341
wwwinnocenceprajectoty
January 13, 2014
Hon. Bryan Goertz
Bastrop County District Attorney 804 Pecan St.
Bastrop, Texas 78602
Re: Proposal for Agreed Forensic Testing Dear Mr. Goertz:
I am writing on behalf of my client Rodney Reed to ask for your agreement in conducting DNA and other forensic testing on evidence retained in the case. There have been significant advances in the science of DNA testing since Mr. Reed's 1998 capital murder trial for the murder of Stacey Stites. These advances allow us to detect the DNA profile of a person from even a few skin cells left during this violent strangulation murder_vvhereas the technology available in 1998 was limited to larger samples of tissue or bodily tluids. By utilizing the new technology in DNA and other forensic testing, we are now capable of providing dispositive answers continuing Mr. Reed:s consistent claim of innocence The cost of this agreed testing Will be paid for by the Innocence Project.
I have attached a list of evidence that Was collected in the case that I believe is (1) suitable for DNA or other forensic testing and (2) capable of producing results that can prove Mr. Reed’s innocence See Appendix A. This evidence includes: o 'l"he belt used to strangle Ms. Stites
o Biclogical samples taken from Ms. Stites’ body
v Relevant areas of Ms. Stites’ clothing
Benjamin N. Cardczo Sch col cf Law, Yeshiva Un|\rersity
|nnocence Pro]ect, |nc. January13, 2014 Page 2
- Hairs found on Ms. Stites’ body and clothing
0 Ms. Stites’ name tag left by the perpetrator on her body ¢ Iterns on the ground near truck
0 Condoms found near Ms. Stites’ body
l Fingerprints found on Ms. Stites’ truck and other items
l White T-shirt found near body
The Texas legislature recently enacted a law requiring § suitable evidence collected in a capital murder prosecution to be subjected to DNA testing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.43(i). Especially where Mr. Reed has consistently claimed innocence and legitimate questions have been raised indicating a third party’s guilt, it is appropriate to conduct the same level of forensic testing that Would be done in a current capital murder prosecution Conducting this post-conviction testing by agreement and in the interest of justice will conserve judicial resources and that of our respective offices which would otherwise be spent on contested litigation under Chapter 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and other available remedies. Expeditious DNA testing by agreement now will also ensure protracted litigation under chapter 64 does not interfere with the course of the pending
habeas proceedings New DNA and Other Forensic Testiug Cao be Pert`ormed on the Evidence
DNA testing has come a long way since 1998. At the time of the trial, forensic DNA testing was geared towards bodily fluids such as blood, semen, and saliva. The increased sensitivity of today’s DNA tests allow profiles to be obtained from only a few cells that are Shed during a struggle or rough handling of a body or item. Flurthermore, certain DNA technology is now designed to obtain results from degraded and contaminated samples that would not have been suitable for testing in the past. Y-STR testing looks only at male DNA, allowing miniscule amounts of a male perpetrator’s DNA to be detected when it previously would have been masked by a female victim’s prolile. And finally, mitochondrial DNA testing can be used to obtain DNA profiles from hairs that have, to date, only been examined microscopically.
There are a number of items that have never been subjected to DNA testing that could produce dispositive results. Items that were tested in 1998 can also be subjected to the considerably more
advanced and sensitive DNA techniques described above.
|nnocence Project, lnc. January 13. 2014 Page 3
Forcl'bly handled or grabbed items The most obvious items for testing are the pieces of the belt used to strangle Ms. Stites _ and portions cf Ms. Stites’ clothing that were forcefully grabbed The perpetrator certainly ` handled Ms. Stites’ belt with enough force to both strangle her and break the belt in two. Furthermore, Ms. Stites was partially disrobed by the perpetrator and carried out of the truck and into the brush The handling of Ms. Stites’s jeans was so forceful as to have broken her zipper. The belt and areas of Ms. Stites’s clothing that were grabbed by the perpetrator during a struggle or while dragging the body will contain skin cells that can now generate a DNA profile The same may be true for items handled by the perpetrator during and after the violent struggle such as Ms. Stites’s nametag and items found outside of her truck. Findiug the DNA prcEle of a third party on these probative items (especially if the same profile is discovered on multiple items) will be powerful evidence that the source of this DNA is the perpetrator of this crimc, and not Mr. Recd.
Fingerprints
There were a number of unidentified fingerprints collected in the case, including from Ms. Stites’ truck and items likely handled by the perpetrator. It is unclear whether these prints were entered into the IAFIS data base where they are compared against known offenders or other unidentified forensic samples Further, fingerprints arc known to contain skin cells from their source. DNA testing of latent lifts has been found capable of detecting at least partial
DNA profiles in some cases.
Bodily fluids
Althougll some of the items that could contain relevant sexual assault evidence were likely rooted lo 1998,1 the advances in DNA roohoology warrant additional zoning or lois evidence Testing should be done on any remaining portions or extracts of sexual assault evidence and the oondoms collected from the scenc. Although the condoms were discounted as “cld” at trial, DNA testing that shows a mixture of the victim’s DNA and a third party on the coudom would contradict this assumption and implicate the third party in the crime. The fact that the condoms may have been collected by a third party should not deter testing either-the method of collection cannot discount the potential relevance of the evidence See In re Michnel Morron, 326 S.W.3d 634 (Tex. App._Austin, 2010, no pet.) (DNA testing of bandana collected by relative of defendant resulted in exoneration of Merton and identification of actual perpetrator). Testing of sexual assault evidence from Ms. Stites can also reveal previously undetected amounts of semen or chemical lubricants left after intercourse With a condom.
Har°rs Arld finally, DNA testing of hairs can now be accomplished either through traditional
DNA testing of the roots of the hair or specialized mitochondrial DNA testing of the hair shaft This can be done to identify the source of unknown hairs found on Ms. Stites’ body and
clothing
1 Even if it appears that physical items of evidence Were fully consumed in prior tcsting, labs often retain unused extracts of DNA taken from the evidence Thcse extracts can be excellent sources for subsequent testing.
Innocence Project, |nc. January 13, 2014 Page 4
DNA and Other Forensic 'I‘esting Can Exonerate Mr. Reed and Identify the Perpetrator
Throughout the course of the investigation, there were a number of suspects identified including limmy Fcunell and David lawhon-both with a history of similar sex offenses DNA was collected from many other suspects as well. The DNA testing discussed above can both exclude Mr. Reed from crucial physical evidence in the case and generate DNA profiles for comparison to these and other known suspects Moreover, DNA profiles can be submitted to DNA databases to identify a perpetrator who has been previously overlooked
Reteslr‘ng SexualAssault Evl'dence
Retesting of the sexual assault evidence is particularly important in light of the inconclusive trial DNA results from the rectal,swab and the recent sworn statement by retired Travis County Medical Examiner Rcberto Bayardo, M.D. Although DNA testing at trial confirmed that the sperm found in Ms. Stites vagina was almost certainly Mr. Reed’s, the results of the testing of the rectal swab in this case was inconclusive Although the State’s retained expert testified that Mr. Reed could not be excluded from the single DNA marker detected, she was unable to provide any statistical relevance to that result Modern DNA testing has the capacity to identify a profile that is statistically unique to the population of the
planet.
Furthermore, Dr. Bayardo has re-evaluated the case and now states that the forensic evidence suggests that Mr. Reed and Ms. Stites had consensual sex more than 24 hours before her death. While Dr. Bayado believes that Ms. Stites was anally assaulted at or near the time of her death, be concludes that this was done either with a foreign object cr by a person who did not ejaculate. Excluding Mr. Reed from the sperm fraction of the rectal swabs or finding a another man’s sperm in the sexual assault evidence or mixed with Stites’ DNA on the condom, for example, would corroborate Dr. Bayado’s sworn statement and demonstrate that the source
of the foreign DNA is the likely perpetrator.
Testl`ug the Belt, Clothing, and Other Irems Harldled In the Struggle
Modern DNA testing can detect a DNA profile that is unique to the population of the planet from a microscopic amount of skin cells or other biological material. We know that the belt, Ms. Stites’ clothing, and other items Were handled forcefully by the perpetrator timing the commission of the crime and the disposal of Ms. Stites’ body. DNA testing of these items can now detect the profile of the perpetrator where the technology in 1998 could not.
It is reasonable to assume that the source of a foreign DNA profile on the ends of the belt used to straugle Ms. Stites, for example, would be significant evidence of the guilt of the person associatedl This would be more powerful if the same profile was found on both halves of the belt_despite being left in separate locations and collected by different people.
Innocence Project, Inc. January 13 2014 Page 5 ‘
The relevance of finding a foreign DNA profile becomes stronger as this profile is found on more probative items. lf, for example, the same DNA profile is found on (1) both halves of the belt used to strangle Stites, (2) the shirt alleged to have been used to wipe for prints, (3) the waistband of Stites’s jeans by Which she Was dragged into the Woods, (4) the name tag placed by the perpetrator between Ms. Stites’s legs, and (5) other items strewn outside of the truck; then it likely that the source of the DNA is the perpetrator. Indeed the Court of Crirninal Appeals recognized the importance of this type of redundant DNA evidence when it authorized DNA testing in the Darlie Routier casc. See Rontier v. State, 273 S.W.Sd
241, 257-58 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
The importance of such evidence would be increased even more if DNA profiles obtained from handled evidence matched the DNA detected from testing the hairs or the sexual assault evidence or was consistent with a person identified from fingerprints
Matching Know Suspect or Kncwn Ojfender in DNA Database
DNA results, like Hngerprints, can be used to positively identify an unknown suspect through a database search or comparison to a known suspect ln this case, Jimmy Fennell is the most likely alternative suspect While it would be expected to find Mr. Fennell’s DNA in his truck or even on Ms. Stites, finding Fennell’s DNA on areas directly linked to the crime such as the ends of the belt cr areas of Ms. Stites’s clothing forcible handled by the perpetrator must be seen as evidence of Fennell’s guilt The presence of another known suspect’s DNA in these areas would likewise have no innocent explanation And linally, a DNA profile obtained from the evidence can be uploaded to the state and national CODIS DNA database. This comparison could reveal the profile of a previously unknown suspect as it did in the recent Texas exonerations of lnnocence Project clients Michael Morton and Randolph Arledgez. Roughly 50% of the 300+ DNA exonerations in this country have resulted` 111 the identification of the
actual perpetrator.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, DNA testing can provide powerful evidence that both exonerates Mr. Reed and identifies who really committed this crime. The State did not have the benefit of current technology when it prosecuted Mr. Reed in 1998. And if Mr. Reed were prosecuted today, Texas law Would require all of the DNA testing requested in this letter to be performedl
Therefcre, l respectfully request that you consider performing this testing by agreement as an alternative to litigation under Chapter 64 and/or other available rcmedies. The Innocence Project will pay for all agreed testing at a mutually agreed independent and accredited laboratory.
2 Morton was proven innocent after a search of the CODIS database identified Bastrop resident Marlr Allan Norwood who was later convicted of a similar murder in A.ustin. Mr. Arledge was shown innocent after a CODIS search of evidence from a multiple stabbing murder matched David Simms who worked near where the victim disappeared and who had been convicted a few years earlier of another multiple stabbing. Ex Parte Arledge Nc. AP76-974 ('I`ex. Cri.rn. App. 2013}.
lnnocenee Projeot, lnc. January 13, 2014 Page 6
Please dc not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about this proposal or need any additional information l look forward to working with you on this matter. t
Sincerelyil :
Bryce Benjet Staff Attorney
cc. Mark Chehi, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Amirew MacRae, Levatino Pacc, LLP
APPENDIX A
RODNEY REED EVIDENCE FOR TEST[NG
EVIDENCE FOUND AT HIGH SCHOOL
DATE OBTAINED ITEM(S} SOURCE LAB EVIDENCE RESULTS CURRENT COLLECTED BY SUBMISSSION? PROCESSING LOCATION 4/23/95 Sgt.WalkeI/' White On 4/23/96 / Item latent Prints DNA Sec. BPD paper ground #26 Pdntstemen !Neg. DPS Lab napk:in near truck Semen 4/23/96 Sgt.Walker/ Piece of On 4/23/96 / 111-4 Match to belt Positive Crim. Sec. BPD Blue ground from scene lD/torn not DPS lab Braided near truck cut Belt 4/23/96 Sgt.Walkerf White On 4/23/96 l Item Latent Prints Prints DNA Sec. BPD HEB lnk ground #27 DPS lab Pen near truck 4/23/96 Sgt.Walker/ Carbon On 4/23/96 litem latent Prints LI,LM DNA Sec._ BPD copies of ground #28 (23¢), LR Of DPS lab checks near truck Fennell
EVIDENCE RECOVERED FROM TRUCK
DATE _ OBTA]NED fI`EM(S] SOURCE LAB EVIDENCE RESULTS CURRENT COLLECTED BY SUBMISSION? PROCESSING LOCAJT__ION 4/24!96 Wardlow Gas Pass. side 4!24/96 Item #2- latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS Emereen¢t door 35th rerun lab b°°k ecket tex #36) 13 4/°24/96 Sandifer latent Pass. side 4/24/96 by TS Compare to Unknown Latent Sec. finger in parties result DPS lab print Window (ex #373.) gl§s 4/24!96 Wardlcw Pulse On seat 4/24/96 Item #2- latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS Withdraw below 38b/TS result lab al slip (ex armrest rssb) 4/24/96 Wardlow Bridal Center 4/24[96/Item #2- latent Prints Unlmown DNA Sec. DPS Shop drink 39/'[`8 result lab Receipt holder (ex. #39 4/214/96 Wardlow Green Center 4/24/96/Item #2- latent Prints Unlrnowu DNA Sec. DPS Cigarette drink 40/TS result lab lighter holder (ex. #40) 4/24/96 Wardlow Meial Center 4/24[96/Item #2- latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS Box drink 4lfl’S result lab Cutter holder (ex #41) 4/24/96 Wardlow Pack of Front 4/24/96/Ite1n #2- Latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS Big lied floor- 42/TS result lab (ex. #42) board near shifter 4/24/96 Wardlow Wal-Mart Front 4/24/96/Item #2- latent Prints Unlmown DNA Sec. DPS receipt ashtray 43c/I'S result lab ex. #43c) 4/24/96 Wardlow Business Sunglass 4/24/96/Item #2- Latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS card: compart- 44/TS result lab
R. ment< Kavieff = (ex #44) 4/24/96 Wardlow Blue/ Bed of 4/24/96/Item #2~ latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS Yellow pick-up 45/TS result Lab plastic truckl bag ' tex #45) _ 4/24/96 Wardlow Gold Frontl 4/24/96/Itern #Z- latent Prints Unknown DNA Sec. DPS hoop floorboar 48/TS result Lab earring d (ex #48) 4/24/96 Wardlow Knife in Rear 4/24/96/113111 #ll- Body No DNA Sec. DPS scabbard floorboard 54/wY&Ts nuids/rscen: fluids/one lab (ex #54) (“fas Prints Result Sntes} _ 4/24/96 Wardlow Blue Bed of 4/24/96 by Kept for NIA DNA Sec. DPS nylon pick-up Wardlow comparison lab rope truck (ex #55) 4/24!96 Wardlow Brown Bed of 4/24/96 Wardlow Kept for N/A DNA Sec. DPS rope pick-up comparison lab (ex #56) truck EV]])ENCE LOCATED AT CRIME SCENE DATE onTAmnn rrEM(s) soUnCE LAB EVIDENCE RESULTS CURRENT COLLECTED BY SUBMISSION? PROCESSING LOCATION 4!23/96 R. Wa.rdlow Breided Edge of 4/24/96/Item Cornpare to belt Physically Crirne Sec. belt roadway #III-S/GL from school matched DPS Lab (ex #18) two pieces 4/23!96 R. Wardlow White T- In shrubs/ 4/23/96/[tem #I- Trace No Crime Sec. shirt brush SIGL evidencebedy evidentiary DPS Lab (ex #8) fluids stains/dirt on shirt
EVIDENCE RECOVERED FROM VICTIM
DATE OBTAINED ITEM SOURCE LAB EVIDENCE RESULTS CURRENT NO'I`ES COLLECTED BY (S) SUBMISSION'.’ PROCESSING LOCATION 4/23/96 Wardlow/ Strand left sock 4/23/96/Item Compare to Not Crirn. Sec. Reporr Blakely of (ex #3) #1-3/GL Y &. involved consistent DPS lab (5“17~97 Hair SR parties With by_ SR_ Fennel, m,d this Barton or halt ms victim. lmch CDI!SISIB!H Somewhat with similar and vic¢im) dissimilar to Comer 4/23/96 `V\frirrilow,l Strand Back of 4/23/96/Item Compare to Similar to Crim. Sec. Blakely of left leg #1-4/GL & SR involved Stites DPS Lab Hair (ex #4) parties 4!23;'96 Wardlowf Strand On back 4123!96!ltem Compere to Not Crir.n. Sec. Report Blakely of near bra #1-6/GL involved consistent DPS Lab (6-17-97 Hair (ex #6) parties with said victim, unsuit-
Fennell, able for Barton or compComer arison) 4/23/95 WaIdloW/ Tape Pubic 4/23/96/Iten1 Tracc l head hair Crirn. Sec. Hajr" Blakely Lift Arca #I-ZO/GL & Evidenccf detectcd, DPS Lab similar (cx #20) WY DNA unable to and disextract similar DNA to ' Comer 4/23/96 Wardlow Blue On victim 4/23/96/Item Trace Wool DNA Sec. cotton (ex #16) til-16wa & evid./Blood/ fibers/no DPS Lab pants GL Semen body fluids 4/23/'96 Wardlow Black On victim 4/23/96/Item Trace Fabric/ DNA Sec. bra (ex #23) #I-ZS/WY & evidJBlood/ underwire DPS Lab GL Semen melted 4f23/'96 Wardlow Green On victim 4/23/96!Item Trace Semen[DQ DNA Sec. cotton (ex #17) #1-17/ML & evid ./Blood/' alpha DPS Lab Panties GL Semen (#) 4/23/96 Wardlow I-IEB In crook 4/23/96/Item Prints Unknown DNA Sec. plastic of right #1/TS results DPS lab name leg bag (ex #1] EVIDENCE LIST FROM ME’S OFFICE DA'I`E OBTAINED lTEM[S) SOURCE LAB EVIDENCE RESULTS CURRENT COLLECTED BY SUBMISSION PROCESS]I*JG l)OCAT!ON 4/24/96 Bayardo Vaginal Victim’s ME Tox/Dps Process of Pos. (M`E) / DNA Sec. Swabs vagin_a #VI-l/WY Semen/DNA Pos. (DPS) DPS Lab 4/24/96 Bayardo Rectal Victirn’s ME Tox/Dps Process of Neg. (ME)/ DNA Sec. Swabs anus/rectum #VI-S!”W y Semen/DNA Pos. (DPS) DPS Lab =l¢ $
EVIDENCE TAKEN FROM WITNESS
DATE OBTAINED ITEM SOURCE LAB EVI|]ENCE RESU'LTS CURRENT coLLEcTEn BY {s) sUBMIssroN? PRocnserG LocA'rroN 4/29/96 Offlcer Piece of Michelle Not submitted NfA N/A BSCO Scoggins shirt, (2) Clifton Property condoms, Room piece of knife
APPENDIX B
1130/2015 innocence Project, inc Nlail - RE: Phone call on Reed
int nuts l l|l|liliili| illiiii ill
RE: Phone call chile-ed
1 message
Bryce Benjet <bbenjet@innocenceproject.org>
Bryce Benjet <bbenjet@innocenceproject.org> Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:28 AiVi To: iViattheW Ottowey <matthew.ottoway@texasattorneygenerai.gov>, AndreW iVlacRae <amacrae@ievatinepace.com>
lvlatt,
Tuesday is a better time, l can be in the office and much more useful.
Andrew was in Bastrop last week and saw that the physical exhibits had been wrapped in paper. if these are ready to go, maybe we can do an interim order releasing these while we work out location of other evidence. This might give lab something to get started on to expedite.
Have you heard back from other agencies on status of evidence and data/reports? if you have anything for me to review, please send it on.
i‘d like to review the Cellmark file from Meghan Clement. With your permission, l will contact her, ccd to you for authorization to reiease. .
Also let me know if you think the E| Peso order is a good template, and l can work it up for Reed.
One topic l think we should discuss on the cell is whether any agreed order will be under Chapter 64 jurisdiction its not usually en issue in noncapital cases, but if a date is set, l think the order should cite Chapter 64 so that the court has authority to modify or withdraw if necessary.
Bryce On Apr 17, 2014 9:07 AiV|, "Otloway, |V|atthev\i" <rnatthew.ottowey@texasattorneygenerel.gov> Wrote:
Bryce, Unfortunateiy, that time Won't vvor|< for me. Cen we try early next week-2:00 p.m. CT on Tuesday?
lV|ett
From: Bryce Benjet [mailto:bbenjet@innocenceproject.org] Sent: Thursdey,r Apri| 17, 2014 7: 19 AM
To: Otl:oway, Matl:hew
Subject: Phone cell on Reed
iVlatt,
Can we move today's call back to 3:45 your time?
Thanks,
htl;ps:l/mai|.google.comlmailiu/‘ll?ui=2&ik=?OchfoSB&view=pt&as_to=rnanhew.ottm~ey%4Dtexasattorneygenerei.gov&as__sizeoperator=s__s|&as_sizeunit=s_s... 11'2
1130/2015 innocence Project, inc lVlai| - RE: Phone callon Reed B ryce
NOT|CE § This e-mai| message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. lt may contein`contidentia| information that is privileged or l that constitutes attorney work product lf you are not the intended recipientl you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying ofthls e~mai| and any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. |f you have received this e-mail in errorl please immediately notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachment{s) from your system. Thank you.
https:llm ai l .google.comlmai llul1l'?ui =2&ik=70ch0ff38&view= pt&as_to=matlhew.ottoway%40texasattorneygeneral .gov&as_sizeoperator= s_sl &as_sizeuniF s_s. . . 212
APPENDIX C
1130/2015 innocence Prcject, inc Nlail - Rodney Reed -- Today's Phone Call
Bryce Benjet <bbenjet@innocenceproject.org>
Rodhey Reed ;'-"'Today"s Phshe call '
1 message
Ottoway, Matthew <matthew.ottoway@texasattorneygenera|.gov> Thu, lV|ay 15, 2014 at 11:18 AlVl To: Bryce Benjet <bbenjet@innocenceproject.org>
Bryce,
Ed just got back yesterday and, as you can imagine, is having to play catch up. Are you available at either 10:00 a.m. or 2:00 p.m. on lVlonday or Tuesday of next week? Sorry for the late notice.
lVlatt
|Vlatthew Ottoway
Assistant Attomey Genera|
Office of the Attorney General of Texas Phone: 512.463.7463
Fax: 512.320.8132
Email: matthew.ottoway@texasattorneygeneral.gov
htlps:llmail.google.comlmail!w1/?ui=2&ik=70ch0ff38&view=pt&q=ottoway%20after%3A2014%2F2%2F16%20before%3A2014%2F6%2F17&qs=true&search=... 1/1
APPENDIX D
\a,/'
,;ax§12.364.5341
Hon Dou_g_ Shaver 21st Dislr`ict Court 804 Pecan St. Baslrop, Texas 78602 Fax (512) 581-403.8
Via fax and U.S. mail
Re: Hearing on DNA Motio'n, Reedv. State, No. 8701
Dear Ju`dge Shaver:
l am writing to update you on the status of the case and to request sheeting 011 our pending DNA moho'n'. I have c theis avmlable for ' ~ Ottcway asked that
any hearing he scheduled
thn we discussed the case in chambers at this summer s heanag to set the execution date, 1 had just filed M`r Reed*s )NA motion and the Coui't acknowledged that a hearing would be set oh the motion On September 12,21}1:'4,thel State tiled aresponse t'o` 111eDNA.1:notion_, andl Will file Mr. Reed’s reply with evidence attached well' 1a advance ot` any hearth5. Mr. 'R'eed“s caseis a factually and procedurally complsx, and the Cour_t will be asked to make findings oh contested factual issues and to rule on disputed questions of law. I believe that a full day setting is required because the Court will be called upon to consider and resolve contested testimony from expert Wihl_esses regarding the condition of the evidence and the capacity ofDNA teslihgi If the Court is not inclined to set a heating on November 24 or 25 as an administrative matter,_ple'ase let me know as soon as possible andl will tile a format motion.
seem N_ causal school oftaw, rehire merely
District Clerl<, Bastrop County
[233] - '_ \-~___ `_,-..___
lnnoc_enco Project, hic. Oclober 7, 2014 Pags 2
Update on Liniited Agreed DNA 'l`estilig:
I filed Mr. Reed’-s DNA motion this summer after six months of negotiation with the° Attorney 1 General’s O.ffice resulted' in only a limited agreement by the State to test sexual assault evidence iio`ni , the body of the murder victim and a few hairs. Pursnant to that limited agreement and this Court’ s
' order, the evidence was forwarded to the Garland Texas DPS DNA lab for testing. 'I`hat evidence has
since been inventoried and preliminary testing should be underway. I hope to be able to provide the Court with a further update on the progress of this testing at shearing` m Novemher.
Howevcr, the agreed testing does not include relevant ite:ns such as the belt used to sti'angle
die .t..m~h°-i.ie.hrag-=rssd-t., arsg-lisitv- n,.,d, in‘e“~e'e“s=.i. -aadahestst` inn itcn.isiin=shsdia-` site -- ‘
crime that are cmrently held by TXD`PS, the Attorney Genei'al’s evidence room, or the Distri'ct Clerk’s Otiice. The Iriiiooencs Project’s' request to have this additional evidence tested by a fully accredited Texas Laboratory that contracts with DPS at our own expense will be the subject of the hearing_.
I thank you for accepting this appointment as a visiting judge and lending your time,
experienoe, and judgment to this important matter. Arid I again ask that the Conrt set the matter for a hearing administratively or provide notice that aforrnal motion is required
Sin'cerely,
ryce Benjet Sta;E‘Attor'ney, lnnocence Proj set 40. WQTth__:_St-',\ S\_lit€ "-'/'0_-1 Nc-W Y_Q`t'i<, NY 100-13
tax
cc. Mait Ottoway, Assistant Attorney General
1=11_ED 502%(
DAT ` - Sara. 20/§[ Dlsirlct Clert<. Bas'trop County
[1311] \W,/ o,
EXHIBIT 2
1."30/2015 13-70009 Docket
Genera| Docket United States Court of Appea|s for the Sth Circuit
Court of Appea|s Docket #: 13-70009 DOCkefedl 03/05/2013 Nature of Suit: 3535 Habeas Corpus ~ Death Pena|ty Termed: 01/10/2014 Rodney Reed v. Wi||iam Stephens, Director
Appea| From: Westem District of Texas, Austin
Fee Status: |n Fon'na Pauperis
Case Type |nformation: 1) Death Pena|ty wl Counse| 2) State 3)
Originating Court lnformation: District: 0542-1 : 1:02-CV-142 Court Reporter: Ariinda Lou Rodriguez, Court Reporter Originating Judge: Lee Yeake|, U.S. District Judge Date Filed: 03/05/2002
Date NOA Filed: ` Date Rec'd COA:
03/01/2013 03/01/2013 Prior Cases:
None
Current Cases: None
Panel Assi¢nment: Pane|: CDK EBC SAH Date of Hearing: 12/04/2013 Date of Decision: 011'10/2014 Date Comp|eted: 01/10/2014
RODNEY REED Bryce Benjet, Esq. Petitioner ~ Appe||ant Direct: 212-364-5980
Email: bbenjet@innocenceproject.org Fax: 212-364-5341 [COR LD NTC CJA Appointment] |nnocence Project Suite 701 40 Worth Street New YoFk, NV 10013-0000
|Vlark Stephen Chehi, Esq_ Direct: 302-651-3160 Emai|: mchehi@skadden.com Fax: 302-651-3001 [COR NTC Pro Bono] Skadden, Arps, S|ate, |V|eagher & F|om, L.L.P_ 900 N. King Street _ 1 Rodney Square Wi|mington, DE 19301-0000
Nico|e Andrea DiSa|vo, Esq.
Direct: 302-651-3027
Ema`l|: ndisa|vo@skadden.com
Fax: 302-434-3027 `
[COR NTC Pro Bono]
Skadden, Arps, S|ate, N|eagher& F|oml L.L.P. 900 N. King Street
1 Rodney Square
Wi|mington, DE 19801-0000
Jason Michae| Liberi
Direct: 302-651-3023
Emai|: jason.|iberi@skadden.com
Fax: 302-434-3023
[COR NTC Pro Bono]
Skadden, Arps, S|ate, N|eagher & F|om, L.L.P. 900 N. King Street
https:Ilecf.ca§.uscour|s.gov/cmecflservlet!TransporfRoom 1/9
1/30/2015 13-70009 Docket
R|CK THALER, D|RECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTN|ENT OF CR|M|NAL JUST|CE, CORRECT|ONAL |NST|TUT|ONS D|V|S|ON Terminated: 05/31!2013
Respondent - Appe||ee
W|LL|AIV! STEPHENS, D|RECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTN|ENT OF CR|IV||NAL JUST|CE, CORRECT|ONAL |NST|TUT|ONS D|V|S|ON Respondent - Appe|lee
1 Rodney Square Wilmington, DE 19801-0000
Andrew Fair|es N|acRae
Direct: 512~637-8565
Emai|: andrew@|pfirm.com
Fax: 512-637-1583
{COR NTC CJA Appointment] Levatino Pace, L.L.P.
Bui|ding K, Suite 12
1101 S. Capita| of Texas Highway Austin, TX 78746
Robert A|an Weber, Esq.
Direct: 302-651-3144
Emai|: robert.weber@$kadden.com
Fax: 302-574-3144
[COR NTC Pro Bono]
Skadden, Arps, S|ate, |V|eagher& F|oml L.L.P. 900 N. King Street
1 Rodney Square
Wi|mington, DE 19801-0000
Stephen |Vl. Hoffman, Assistant Attomey Genera| Direct: 512-936-1400
Emai|: stephen.hoffman@texasattomeygenera|.gov Fax: 512-320-8132
[COR LD NTC Government]
O|'“fice of the Attomey Genera|
for the State of Texas
P.O. Box 12548
Capitol Station
Austin, TX 78711-2548
|Vlatthew Dennis Ottoway, Assistant Attomey Genera| Direct: 512-936-1400
Emai|: matthew.ottaway@texasattomeygenera|.gov Fax: 512-320-8132
[COR LD NTC Government]
Of“fice of the Attomey Genera|
Postconviction Litigation Division
300 W. 15th Street - Sth F|oor
Wi||iam P. Clements Bui|ding
Austin, TX 78701-0000
James Patrick Su!|ivan Emai|: jsu||ivan@ks!aw.com [COR LD NTC Govemment] Office of the Attomey Genera| Office of the So|icitor Genera| P.O. Box 12548 (NIC 059) Austin, TX 78711-2548
https:llecf.ca§.uscourts.gov/cmecflserv|eUTransportRoom
[219] 1130/201 5 13-70009 Docket`
7 RODNEY REEDl Petitioner - Appe|lant v.
W|LL|A|V| STEPHENS, D|RECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CR|N||NAL JUSTICE, CORRECT|ONAL |NST|TUT|ONS D|V|SION,
Respondent - Appe||ee
htlps:lfecf.ca§.uscourts.govlcmecflservlet!TransportRoom
31'9
1/301'2015
13-70009 DOcl<et
03/ 05/ 201 3
03/ 05/ 201 3
03/05."2013
03/13/2013
03/14/2013
03/15/2013
03[18/2013
03/19/2013
03[22/2013
03/22/201 3
04/10/2013
04/12/2013
04/15/2013
04/ 231r 201 3
04/23/2013
04/23/2013
04/ 23)' 201 3
04/24/2013
04/24/201 3
05/13/2013
r:)l_
26 pg. 201.21 KB
oil
1 pg. 5.9_8 KB
2 PQ.
C§ [:i
l:l
,,
Cl
2 pg, 12§.28 KB
ol
2 pg. 28:32 KB
l:)l_
1 pg,114.55 KB
ill
Cl
ol
1pg, 151.95 i<e
3 pg, 98.62 KB
l:l
DEATH PENALTY CASE docketed NOA filed by Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed [13-70009] (MRW)
CJA APPO|NTMENT for Attomey Mr. Bryce Benjet, Esq. for iVir. Rodney Reed, Ms. E|izabeth Detweiier for N|r. Rodney Reed and iV|r. Andrew Fairies NiaoRae for Nir Rodney Reed. A voucher will not' issue at this time. Counsei must downioad a voucher from the website at disposition of the case. Piease see the attached document for further guidance
OR|G[NAT|NG COURT DlSTRiCT: WTX
OR|G|NAT|NG CASE NUMBER: 1:02-CV-142 DEFENDANT NUMBER: 1
DATE OF APPO|NT|V|ENT: 03/011'2013 [13-70009] {|V|RW)
|N|T|AL CASE CHECK by Attomey Advisor compiete, Action: Case OK to Process. [7308854-2] initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Transcript order due on 03/20/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed [13-70009] (iViRW)
APPEARANCE FORiV| F|LED by Attomey Niatthew Dennis Ottoway for Appeiiee Rick Thaier, Director, Texas Department of Crimina| Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13-70009 [13-70009] (iViRW)
APPEARANCE FORM FiLED by Attomey Andrew Fairies iViacRae for Appe|lant Rodney Reed in 1370009 [13-70009] (iViRW)
APPEARANCE FORM F|LED by Attomey Bryce Benjet for Appe|lant Rodney Reed' ln 13 -70009 [1370009] (MRW)
TRANSCR|PT ORDER received from Appe|iant Mr. Rodney Reed. DETA|LS: Transcript Order: Court Reporter: Arlinda Lou Rodn'guez, Proceeding Type and Date: Status Conference 09!22/2003 Status Conference 04/19/2005. Transcript Order ddl satisfied. Ct. ReporterAcknowiedgment due on 04)'02/2013 for Arlinda Rodriguez. [13-70009] (N|RW)
LETTER filed from attorneys iViark S. Chehi, Jason Liberi, Nico|e DiSaivo, and Andrew G. iV|irisis advising that Skadden, Arps, Siate, Nieagher & F|om, LLP is representing appellant Reed pro bono and will not seek appointment as counsel or compensation from the court for its representation of Reed. [1370009] (MRW)
COURT REPORTER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT received from Court Repoiter Nirs. A¢iinda Lou Rodriguez. [13-70009] (Ariinda Lou Rodriguez }
ACKNOWLEDGEN|ENT received from Court Reporter Arlinda Lou Rodn'guez. Ct. Reporter Acknowiedgment ddl satisfied Transcript due on 04/19."2013 for Aliinda Lou Rodriguez [13-70009] (i\/iRW}
Attorney iV|ark S. Chehi, Jason Liberi, Nicoie DiSalvo, and Andrew G. Niirisis added as counsel of record for Appe|lant Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [13-70009] (iViRW)
NOT|CE RECE|VED from Court Reporter iVirs. Ariinda Lou Rodriguez, that the transcript ordered by Appe|lant iVir. Rodney Reed is complete and has been filed in the Distriot Court. [13-70009] (Ariinda Lou Rodriguez )
TRANSCR|PT F|LED |N DiSTRiCT COURT Transcript Order: Court Reporter: Arlinda Lou Rodriguez, Dt. Filed in Dist. Ct: 04/12'2013 Transcript deadline satisfied ROA due on 04/30/2013 [13-70009] (MRW)
APPEARANCE FORiVi F|LED by Attomey Andrew G. iViirisis for Appe|lant Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [13-70009] (MRW)
APPEARANCE FORIV| F|LED by Attomey Jason iViichael Liberi for Appe|lant Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [13-70009] (MRW)
APPEARANCE FORM F|LED by Attomey Nico|e Andrea DiSaivo for Appeiiant Rodney Reed in 1370009 [13-70009] (iVlRW)
AF'PEARANCE FORiV| F|LED by Attomey |Viark Stephen Chehi for Appe|lant Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [13-70009] (MRW)
RECORD ON APPEAL F|LED. Electronic P|eadings, 8; E|ectronicTranscript, 2; Exhibits, 3 Boxes State Court Papers; SEALED EXH|BiTS, 1 Envelope (Doc's #18-20,26,30,56-58,60,66,76,78,83,9395,123,133,141-144,155,156,159, 160. 164,185); ROA deadline satisfied. [13-70009] (NiRW)
LETTER |SSUED. iViotion for COA and brief in support are required iViotion due on 06)'03)'2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed. Brief in Support due on 06/03/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed [13-70009] (N|RW)
PHONE EXTENS|ON CONF|RMED for Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed. Extension granted to and including 06/17/2013. Brief in Support deadline updated to 06/17/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed. iv'iotion due deadline updated to 06/17/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed [13-70009] (MRW)
https:/l'ecf.caS.uscourts.govlcm ecf/servletlTransportRoom
[449] 1130/2015 13-70009 Docket
06/05/2013 C] UNOPPOSED MOT|ON filed by Appe|lant |V|r. Rodney Reed to extend time to comply with COA e'pg, 10§_47 KB requirements until 07."17/2013 [7380001-2]. Date of service: 06!05/2013 via emaii - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSaivo, Liberi, iViacRae, iViirisis; Attomey for Appe||ee: Ottoway; US mail - Attomey for Appeliant: Detweiier [13-70009] (Niark Stephen Chehi )
06/05/2013 [:] CLERK ORDER granting in part motion to extend time to comply with COA requirements filed by 1 pg, 55_`79 KB Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed [7380§01-2| Niotion due deadline updated to 07/08/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed Brief in Support deadline updated to 07/08/2013 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed {13-70009] (MRW)
06/26/2013 g LETTER filed from Robert Weber advising that he is a attorney With Skadden, Arps, Siate, DiSaivo, and 2 pg, 44_'06 KB Andrew G. Niirisis and Wiii represent Appe|lant Nir. Rodney Reed pro bono and not seek payment [1370009] (|V|RW)
06/26/2013 ij APPEARANCE FORIV| F|LED by Attomey(s) Robert A|an Weber for party(s) Appe|lant Rodney Reed, in ' case 13~70009 [13-70009} (iViRW) 07/08/2013 C] |V|OT|ON filed by Appeliant Mr. Rodney Reed for certificate of appealability [7405429-2]. Date of service:
4 pg, 25_‘47 KB O7l08/2013 via emaii - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSaivo, Liberi, MacRae, Niirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeiiee: Ottoway; US mail - Attomey for Appeliant: Detweiier [13-70009] REV|EWED AND!OR ED|TED. MOT|ON filed by Appe|lant Nir. Rodney Reed for certificate of appealability [7405429-2]. Date of service'. 07!08/2013 i\/lotion due deadline satisfied.. ResponsefOpposition due on 08107/2013 [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet)
07/08/2013 {:] BR|EF iN SUPPORT filed by Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed in support of motion for certificate of 1780 pg._3B.93 MB appealability [7405429-2]. Date of Service: 07/08/2013 via emai| - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSa|vo, Liberi, |VlacRae, iViirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeiiee: Ottoway; US mail - Attomey for Appeliant: Detweiier. [7405443-1] [13-70009] REV|EWED ANDIOR EDiTED. BR|EF iN SUPPORT in support of motion for certificate of appealability [7405429-2| Brief in Support deadline satisfied. [7405443-1] [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet}
08/05/2013 ij PHONE EXTENS|ON CONF|RN|ED for Appe||ee Nir. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division. Extension granted to and including 09/06/2013 for filing response to COA. [13-70009] (MRW)
08/05/2013 Q RESPONSE DUE to motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appe|lant iVlr. Rodney Reed in 1370009 [7405429-2[Response/Opposition deadline updated to 09/06/2013 [13-70009] (iViRW) 09/03/2013 [:] UNOPPOSED |V|OT|ON filed by Appeiiee i\/lr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai
5 pg, 73_“09 KB Justice, Correctionai institutions Division to extend the time to file a response to the brief supporting document [7405443-2| filed by Appe|lant Nir. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 until 10/07/2013 at 12:30 pm [7448463-2]. Date of service: 09/03/2013 via emai| - Attomey for Appeliants\. Benjet, Chehi, Detweiier, DiSaivo, Liberi, NiacRae, iV|irisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliee: Ottoway [13-70009] (i\/iatthew Dennis Ottoway )
09/04/2013 [:] COURT ORDER granting motion to extend time to file a response filed by Appeiiee iV|r. Wi|iiam 2 pg, 11{'5_21 KB Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division to and including October 7, 2013 [7448463-2| Judge(s): CDK, [13-70009] (iViRW)
09/04/2013 C] RESPONSE DUE to motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appe|lant iVir. Rodney Reed in 1370009 [7405429-2|Response/Opposition deadline updated to 10/07)'2013 [13-70009] (NiRW) 09/25/2013 [:] UNOPPOSED iV|OTiON filed by Appei|ee Mr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Cn'mina|
125 pg, §55_67 KB Justice, Correctionai institutions Division to file in excess pages the response/opposition to motion for certificate of appealability [7405429-2|. Date of service: 09/25."2013 via emaii - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, Detweiier, DiSa|vo, Liberi, l\/iacRae, Niirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appei|ee: Ottoway [1370009] (iV|atthew Dennis Ottoway )
10/01/2013 [:] CLERK ORDER granting motion to file response in excess pages filed by Appe|iee iV|r. Wi|iiam 1 pg, 63‘KB Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division [7466069-2|. [13-70009] (MRW) 10/01/2013 C] RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED. Niisce||aneous due on 10/11/2013 for Attomey Nicoie Andrea 1 pg_ 52__12 KB DiSEllVO [13-70009] (MRW) 10/07/2013 ' [] § RESPONSE/OPPOS|T|ON filed by lVir. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai
128 pg. §95.49 KB Justice, Correctionai institutions Division [7474637-1] to the motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appe|lant iVlr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [7405429-2| Date of Service: 10)'07/2013 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, Detweiier, DiSa!vo, Liberi, i\liacRae, |V|irisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeiiee: Ottoway; US mail -Attomey for Appeliant: Detweiier. [13-70009] REV|EWED ANDlOR EDiTED. RESPONSEIOPPOS|T|ON [7474637-1] to the motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appe|lant iVir. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [7405429-2| [13-70009] (Matthew Dennis Ottoway )
https:l'lecf.ca5.uscourts.govlcmecf/serviet/TransportRoom 519
1130/2015 10109/2013
10)'10/2013
10/22/2013
10/24/2013
10/251'2013
11/13/2013
11/13/2013
12/04/2013
12!12/2013
12/20/2013
01/10/2014
01/10/2014
01/22/2014
01/221'2014
021'03/2014
ml
5 pg, 16."26 i<e
ml
3 pg.105.96 KB
ml
2 pg.115.34 KB
i:i ml
96 pg. 2.59 MB
ml
2 pg, 97._21 Ks
ge
2 pg, cc.-63 KB
ml
2 pg, 67._34 KB
ml
1 pg, 51.`29 KB
ml
4 pg, ashe KB
ml
2 pg. 92._38 i<e
m l_
13-70009 Docket
UNOPPOSED MOT|ON filed by Appeliant N|r. Rodney Reed for leave to file a reply [7477482-2] to the response/opposition filed by_Appeiiee Nlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Directorl Texas Department of Criminai Justicel Correctionai institutions Divislon in 13-70009 [7474637-2|, motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appeliant Nlr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [7405429-2|, to extend time to file a reply to the response/opposition {7474637-21 filed by Appeliee iVlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13~70009 until 12/06/2013 at 11:59 pm, to file brief in excess of the word count limitation but not to exceed 14,000 words [7477482-41. Date of service: 10/09[2013 via email -Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvo, Liberi, MacRae. l\)iirisisl Weber; Attomey for Appeliee: Ottoway; US mail - Attomey for Appeliant: Detweiier [13-70009] (Robert A|an Weber)
COURT ORDER granting motion for leave to file a reply filed by Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed the reply should not exceed 7,000 words [ZAZ7482-2i; granting in part motion to extend time to file a reply filed by Appe|lant |Vlr. Rodney Reed until 101'25)'13. No extensions will be granted [7477482-3| Judge(s): CDK. [13-70009] (MRW)
CASE CALENDARED for oral argument on Wednesday, 121041'2013, at 4:00 PlVl, in the East Courtroom, Room 223, of the John iViinor Wlsdom United States Court of Appeals Bui|ding, New Orleans, LA. [1370009] (GA|V|)
A`l'l'ORNEY NOT PART|C|PAT|NG. E|izabeth Detweiier is designated as inactive in this case. [1370009] (MRW)
REPl_Y filed by Appeliant Nir. Rodney Reed in Fun‘her Support of Appiicat:'on for Certificate of Appealability [7490327-1] to the response/opposition filed by Appeliee lVlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Conectional institutions Division in 13-70009 [7474637-2|. Date of Service: 101'25/2013 via small -Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvo, Liberi, iViacRae, iVlirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliee: Ottoway. [13-70009] REV|EWED AND/OR ED|TED.
REPL¥ filed by [7490327-1] to the update/term reply deadline [7478287-2], to the response/opposition filed by Appeliee iv'ir. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13-70009 |7474637-2|Rep|y to Resp/Opp due deadline satisfied.. [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet )
APPEARANCE FORiVi F|LED by Attorney(s) Stephen M. Hoffman for party(s) Appeliee Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division, in case 1370009 [13-70009] (N|RVV)
APPEARANCE FORl\/l F|LED by Attomey(s) James Patrick Suiiivan for party(s) Appeliee Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division, in case 1370009 [13-70009] (iViRW)
ORAL ARGU|V|ENT HEARD before Judges King, Clement, Higginson. Arguing Person information Updated for: Bryce Benjet arguing for Appeliant Rodney Reed; Arguing Person information Updated for: James Patrick Suiiivan arguing for Appeliee Director Stephens, Texas Department of Criminai Justice [13-70009] (PFT)
SUPPLENIENTAL AUTHORIT|ES (FRAP 28j) F|LED by Appeliant Mr. Rodney Reed Date of Service: 12/12/2013 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSaivo, Liberil MacRae, l\/lirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Suiiivan [13-70009] (Niark Stephen Chehi )
RESPONSE filed by Appeliee Mr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division to the 28] letter filed by Appeliant Nir. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [7525089-2| Date of Service: 12/20/2013 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehil DiSa|vo, Liberil lVlacRae, Mirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Suiiivan [13-70009] (James Patrick Suiiivan )
PUBL|SHED OP|N|ON FlLED. [13-70009 Afflrmed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: EBC, Judge: SAH l\f|andate pull date is 01/31!2014; granting motion to file bn'ef in excess of word count filed by Appeliant Mr. Rodney Reed [7477482-4|; denying motion for certificate of appealability filed by Appeliant lV|r. Rodney Reed |7405429-2| [13-70009] (JMA)
JUDG|V|ENT ENTERED AND FlLED. [13-70009] (J|V|A)
UNOPPOSED lViOTlON filed by Appeliant lVlr. Rodney ReedReed to extend the time to file a rehearing until 02/07!2014 at 11:59 pm [7550849-2]. Date of service: 01."22/2014 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSa|vo, Liberi, iViacRae, lVlirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Suiiivan [13-?0009] (Bryce Benjet )
COURT ORDER granting in part motion to extend the time to file a petition for rehearing filed by Appe|lant lVlr. Rodney Reed [7550849~2 unti1021'03l2014 at 12:00 pm. No further extension will be granted Mandate pull date updated to 02)'03/2014 Judge(s): CDK. [13-70009] (MRW}
PET|T|ON filed by Appe|lant lVir. Rodney Reed for rehearing en banc [7558771-2]. Date of Service:
https:.'/ecf.caS.uscourts.govlcmecflserv|etlTransportRoom
[619] 1/30!2015
02/03/2014
02/04/2014
02/04)'2014
02)'04)'2014
02/10/2014
02/18/2014
02/27/2014
02/27/2014
021'27/201 4
02/281'201 4
03/10)'2014
03/1'|/2014
03/14/2014
03/17/2014
03/171'2014
66 pg. 674.5 KB
ml
70 pg, 1.'33 ivie
D
ml
53 pg, 2?7.25 l<s
ml
1 pg. 65.'06 Ks
ml
5 pg. 79.`96 KB
ml
2 ps,111.4s i<a
i_:i
ml
4 pg. 61&.52 Ke
ml
20 pg, 122.44 KB
ml
1 pg, 251.47 Ks
ml
13 pg, 6`25.39 Ke
ml
2 pg,115.27 KB
ml
9 pg. 21?3.36 i<e
13-70009 Docket
02/03/2014 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvo, Liberi, NlacRae, Mirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appe|lees: Hoffman, Suiiivan [13-?0009] REV|EWED AND/OR ED|TED.
PET|T|ON for rehearing en banc [7558771~2] iVlandate pull date canceled.. Paper Copies of Rehearing due on 02/10/2014 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed.. [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet )
PET|T|ON filed by Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed for_ reheaan [7558831-2]. Date of Service: 02/03/2014 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvo, Liberi, iViacRae, i\/iirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Suiiivan [13-70009] REV|EWEDAND/OR ED|TED.
PET|T|ON for rehearing [7558831-2] Paper Copies of Rehearing due on 02/10)'2014 for Appe|lant Rodney Reed.. [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet )
Paper copies of petition for rehearing filed by Appeliant ivir. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 received Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes # of Copies Provided: 4. Paper Copies of Rehearing due deadline satisfied [13-70009] (MRW)
Paper copies of petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appeliant lVlr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 received Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes # of Copies Provided: 20. [13-70009] (iVlRW)
APPEARANCE FOR|Vl F|LED by Attomey lVlatthew Dennis Ottoway for Appeliee Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13-70009 [13-70009] (NiRW)
REV|SED PUBL|SHED OP|N!ON FlLED. [7543391-2| [13-70009] (lelA)
COURT DiRECTlVE |SSUED requesting a response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appeliant lVlr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 |7558771-2| ResponselOpposition due on 02/281'2014. [1370009] (MRW)
UNOPPOSED lViOTlON filed by Appeiiee i\/ir. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division to extend the time to file a response to the petition for rehearing en banc [7558771-2| filed by Appeliant lVlr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 until 03.'10/2014 at 11:59 pm [7576869-2]. Date of service: 02/27/2014 via email ~ Attomey for Appeliants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvo, Liberi, lVlacRae, Nlirisis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffmanl Ottowayl Suiiivan [13-70009] (lVlatthew Dennis Ottoway )
COURT ORDER granting motion to extend time to file a response filed by Appeliee iVlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division [7576869-2| Judge(s): CDK. [13-70009] (lViRW)
RESPONSE DUE to court order Court directive requesting a response [7569352-2|Responsel'Opposition deadline updated to 03/10!2014 [13-70009] (lViRW)
DOCUN|ENT RECE|VED - NO ACT|ON TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the letter from Jeff Tamarkin because only counsel can file documents [13-70009] (MRW)
RESPONSEIOPPOSIT|ON filed by lVlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justicel Correctionai institutions Division and iVlr. Rick Thaier, Directorl Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division [7583356-1] to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appe|lant Mr. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 17558771-2 Date of Service: 03!10/2014 via email - Attorney for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehil DiSalvo, Liberi, l\llacRae, iVlin'sis, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Ottoway, Suiiivan. [13-70009] REV|EWED ANDIOR ED|TED.
RESPONSE/OPPOS|T|ON [7583356-1] to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appeliant Nir. Rodney Reed in 13-70009 [7558771-2|, update/term response deadline [7577250-2]Response/Opposition deadline satisfied [13-70009] (Niatthew Dennis Ottoway)
A`l'l'ORNEY NOT PART|C|PAT|NG. Andrew G. iViirisls is designated as inactive in this case. Reason:no longer with Skadden, Arps, Siate, l\/leagher & F|om, LLP. [13-70009] (lVlRW)
OPPOSED lVlOT|ON filed by Appeliant Mr. Rodney Reed for leave to file a reply [7587361-2] to the response/opposition filed by Appe|lees iVlr. Rick Thaier, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justicel Correctionai institutions Division and Nlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13-70009 |7583356-2|. Date of service: 03/14)'2014 via email - Attomey for Appe|lants: Benjet, Chehi, DiSalvol Liberi, MacRae, Weber; Attomey for Appeliees: Hoffman, Ottoway, Suiiivan [13-70009] (Bryce Benjet )
COURT ORDER granting motion for leave to file a reply filed by Appeliant lV|r. Rodney Reed [7587361-2] Judge(s): CDK. [13-70009] (MRW)
REPLY filed by Appeliant Nir. Rodney Reed [7588028-1] to the response/opposition filed by Appeliees Mr. Rick Thaier, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justicel Correctionai institutions Division and Nlr. Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in 13-70009 [7583356-2|, to the petition for reheaan en banc filed by Appeliant-Mr. Rodney Reed in 1370009 |7558771-2|. Date of Service: 03/14/2014. [13-70009] (iViRW)
https:i'/ecf.caS.uscourts.gov/cmecflservlet/TransportRoom
[719] 1130/2015 ` ` 13~70009 Docl<et
03)'19/2014 ij COURT ORDER denying petition for rehearing filed by Appe|lant |V|r. Rodney Reed [7558831-2 ; denying 3 pg, 94_'75 KB petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appeliant Nlr. Rodney Reed [7558771-2| Without Poil. [13-70009] `; (lVlRW) 03/19/2014 ij MANDATE iSSUED FORTHW|TH. [13-70009] (|VlRW) 2 pg. 79.'49 KB 06/20/2014 {:] § SUPREl\/lE COURT NOT|CE that petition for writ of certiorari [7663597-2] was filed by Appeliant Mr. 1 pg, 56_`05 KB Rodney Reed on 06."17)'2014. Supreme Court Number: 13-1509. [13-70009] (LGL) 11/04/2014 [:] § SUPREME COURT ORDER received denying petition for writ of certiorari filed by Appeliant l\/|r. Rodney 2 pg, 121_03 KB Reed in 13-70009 on 11/03/2014. [7768156~1] [13-70009] (LGL)
https://ecf.ca$.uscourts.govlcmecflservlet/TransportRoom
[819] 1130/2015 Clear A_ll_
@ Docurnents and Docket Summary O Documents Only
[:J include Page Numbers
Seiected Pages: 0 - `
7 View Selected 7
7 77 7 Se|ected Size: §KB nn Totais reflect accessible documents only and do not include unauthorized restricted documents.
13-70009 Docket
: {Max: 10 MB)
PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
ah circuit - Appeiiaie - 01130/2015 13;23;37 PACER Login: ||rp0033:2550643;0 ||cliemcode: J|reed
Description:
Docket Report (full) Search CritthS-?OUOQ
Bi||ab|e Pages:
7 Cost:
1|0.70
https.'ilecf.ca5.uscourts.gov/cmecflservlet/TransportRoom
[919] 1/30.'2015 Search - Supreme Court of the United States
Visiting the Court | Touring the Bui|ding | Exhibitions
Search: ®Ail Documents ODocket
Enter Search Text:| z Search| He|p
Home | Search Resu its
No. 13-1509 *** CAP|TAL CASE *** Title: Rodney Reed, Petitioner v.
Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division
Docketed:' June 19, 2014 Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeais for the Fifth Circuit Case Nos.: (13-70009).
Decision Date: January 10, 2014 Rehearing Denied: iVlarch 19, 2014
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedlngs and Orders Jun 17 2014 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed (Response due July 21, 2014)
..lul 21 2014 Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 20, 2014. Jul 21 2014 Brief amici curiae of Eight Retired Judges filed
Aug 19 2014 Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including September 19, 2014.
Sep 19 2014 Brief of respondent Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division in opposition filed
Oct 7 2014 Reply of petitioner Rodney Reed filed. Oct 8 2014 D|STRlBUTED for Conference of October 31, 2014.
http:llwww.supremecourt.govlsearch.aspx?&ienamr-:=ldocketiiiesl13-1509.htm 112
1130/2015 Search - Supreme Court of the United States
Nov 3 2014 Petition DEN|ED.
~~Name ~~~~~~~Add ress ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attomeys for Petitioner:
Bryce Benjet 40 Worth Street (212) 364-5980 Counsel of Record Suite 701
New York, NY 10013 Party name: Rodney Reed Attomeys for Respondent: Edward L. i\/larshali Chief, Criminai Appeais Division (512) 936-1400 Counsel of Record Office of the Attomey Genera| P.O. Box 12548 Capitoi Station Austin, TX 78711-2548 edward.marshall@texasattorneygenerai.gov Party name: Wi|iiam Stephens, Director, Texas Department of Criminai Justice, Correctionai institutions Division
Other:
Jessica L. Ellsworth Hogan Lovelis US LLP (202) 637-5886 555 13th Street, N. VV. ` Washington, DC 20004 jessica.eiisworth@hoganlovells.com
Party name: Elght Retired Judges
January 29, 2015 | Version 2014.1 Home | He|p | Site Map | Contact Us [About Us | FAQ | Jobs | Links | Bui|ding Regulations Website Policies and Notices | Privacy Policy | USA.GOV
Supreme Court of the United States
http:/!www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?hiename=idocl<ernles/13-1509.htm
Loading…