MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION AND FURTHER ABEYANCE OF PROCEEDINGS
Gregory Thompson, through undersigned counsel, requests this Court to enter an order staying the February 7, 2006 execution date and holding the instant proceeding in abeyance until Mr. Thompson's federal habeas case is completed. A stay order holding this matter is abeyance is warranted because recent events demonstrate that the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit retains jurisdiction over Mr. Thompson's habeas corpus case and is actively reviewing it. In support of this motion, Mr. Thompson shows:
(1) Mr. Thompson's first federal habeas case is not completed. By letter of October 26, 2005, the Sixth Circuit Court directed the State to respond to Mr. Thompson's rehearing petition. (Attachment A). Thus, the federal court is still reviewing the case and future federal proceedings are reasonably anticipated.
(2) This matter commenced September 19, 2005 when the State of Tennessee moved to set an execution date for Mr. Thompson. This Court then entered an order scheduling Mr. Thompson's execution for February 7, 2006.
(3) On September 29, 2005, counsel for Mr. Thompson filed a Motion For Stay Of Execution, Petition For Reconsideration Of The Order Scheduling An Execution Date, Notice Of Change In Mental Health Status, Insanity And Incompetency To Be Executed And Request For Certificate Of Commutation. The Petition For Reconsideration was grounded on the fact that the federal habeas proceeding was still pending and Tenn.S.Ct.R. 12.4(A) requires that "the standard three-tier appeals process must be completed before an execution date may be set." See Motion For Stay Of Execution, Petition For Reconsideration, etc. pp. 5-8. At the time when the State requested an execution date, a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc was pending in the Sixth Circuit. When the State requested an execution date, the Sixth Circuit had not issued its mandate; therefore, Mr. Thompson's case was not completed and the Sixth Circuit maintained jurisdiction over the case.
On September 30, 2005, the State filed a motion with the Sixth Circuit requesting immediate issuance of its mandate. This motion has not been decided.
(4) On October 18, 2005, this Court entered an order denying Mr. Thompson's Motion but holding his Ford claim in abeyance until November 18, 2005, to allow Mr. Thompson to submit any further affidavits or other evidence showing a change in his mental health status.
(5) Because the Sixth Circuit is adjudicating and actively considering Mr. Thompson's case, this Court should enter an order postponing the November 18, 2005 date, holding this case in abeyance and staying the execution. WHEREFORE, the interests of judicial economy and finality animating
Tenn.S.Ct.R. 12.4(A) support this Court rescinding or staying the February 7, 2006, execution date and holding this matter in abeyance until the federal case is completed.