No. 25-690
Ryan Thornell, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, et al. v. Bradley Bieganski
Tags: burden-shifting constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus ninth-circuit-review
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2026-01-23
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the Ninth Circuit fail to apply the correct deferential standard of review, as set out in 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and also misapply this Court's precedents, set out in Martin and Patterson, regarding when an affirmative defense improperly shifts the burden of proof to a criminal defendant, in violation of the Due Process Clause?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Ninth Circuit fail to apply the correct deferential standard of review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and misapply Supreme Court precedents regarding burden-shifting in criminal cases?
Docket Entries
2026-02-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 11, 2026.
2026-01-30
Motion of Bradley Bieganski for an extension of time submitted.
2026-01-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 9, 2026 to March 11, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
2026-01-09
Response Requested. (Due February 9, 2026)
2026-01-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/23/2026.
2026-01-05
Waiver of right of respondent Bradley Bieganski to respond filed.
2025-12-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 12, 2026)
2025-11-06
Application (25A523) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until December 10, 2025.
2025-11-04
Application (25A523) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 10, 2025 to December 10, 2025, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Bradley Bieganski
Randal Boyd McDonald — Law Office of Randal B. McDonald, Respondent
Ryan Thornell, et al.
Jason Dale Lewis — Arizona Attorney General's Office, Petitioner