ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

http://www.josemedellin.info/legal/08-5573-medellin-petition.pdf

No. 08-_____

===============================================================


IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States


--------------------------------- . ---------------------------------
JOS� ERNESTO MEDELL�N,

Petitioner,

vs.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,


Respondent.

--------------------------------- . ---------------------------------

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
--------------------------------- . ---------------------------------

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS


--------------------------------- . ---------------------------------

SANDRA L. BABCOCK DONALD FRANCIS DONOVAN
Clinical Professor of Law (Counsel of Record)
Northwestern University School of Law CATHERINE M. AMIRFAR
357 E. Chicago Avenue JILL VAN BERG
Chicago, Illinois 60611 WILLIAM C. WEEKS
Tel: (312) 503-0114 DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
919 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022-3916
(212) 909-6000
Attorneys for Petitioner

===============================================================



i

CAPITAL CASE

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

In the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex. v. U.S.), 2004

I.C.J. 12 (Mar. 31), the International Court of Justice determined that Jos� Ernesto
Medell�n and fifty other Mexican nationals under sentence of death in the United States
were entitled to receive judicial review and reconsideration of their convictions and
sentences in light of the violation of their rights under the Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations in their capital murder trials. In Medell�n v. Texas, 128 S. Ct. 1346
(2008), this Court held that the United States is bound under Article 94(1) of the United
Nations Charter to comply with the Avena Judgment and settled the procedures by which,
as a matter of U.S. constitutional law, the international obligation to comply may be
given domestic effect. Specifically, this Court held that neither it nor the President had
the authority to execute the international obligation, which instead lies with the Congress.
In response to that ruling, legislation to implement Avena has been introduced in the U.S.
House of Representatives, yet the State of Texas, having scheduled Mr. Medell�n�s
execution for August 5, 2008, has indicated that it intends to go forward with the
execution before Congress has had a reasonable opportunity to exercise its constitutional
prerogative to determine compliance.
This case presents the following questions:

1.
Whether Mr. Medell�n�s Fourteenth Amendment right not to be deprived of his
life without due process of law entitles him to remain alive until Congress has had
a reasonable opportunity to exercise its constitutional prerogative to implement
the right to judicial review and reconsideration under Avena and Other Mexican
Nationals, so that he can secure access to a remedy to which he is entitled by
virtue of a binding international legal obligation of the United States;
2.
Whether the Court should grant a writ of habeas corpus to adjudicate Mr.
Medell�n's claim on the merits, where he seeks relief pursuant to a binding
international legal obligation that the federal political branches seek to implement,
and where adequate relief cannot be obtained in any other form or from any other
court; and
3.
Whether the Court should recall and stay its mandate in Medell�n v. Texas, 128 S.
Ct. 1346, not to revisit the merits, but to allow Congress a reasonable opportunity
to implement legislation consistent with the Court�s decision in that case.