Opinion ID: 795361
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The District Court's stay of Michael's execution

Text: 11 Approximately one week before the scheduled execution date, the Defender Association of Philadelphia, Capital Habeas Corpus Unit, moved for a stay of execution and an appointment of counsel in the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. That Court granted the stay and appointed the Defender Association as Michael's counsel. Michael then wrote a letter dismissing the Defender Association from acting as his counsel and requesting that Governor Ridge re-sign his execution warrant as soon as possible. Michael, 2004 WL 438678, at . 12 In response, the Defender Association took the position that Michael was not competent. The District Court directed the Defender Association to confer with Michael. Following that conference, attorney Billy Nolas submitted a declaration describing Michael as `agitated, incoherent, irrational, sad, unable to control his varying emotions, and ultimately . . . catatonic and completely uncommunicative.' Id. at . The declaration also indicated that Michael had authorized Nolas to litigate his Pennsylvania Post Conviction Relief Act 1 (PCRA) proceedings. The District Court then stayed the federal habeas proceedings so that Michael's PCRA claims could be litigated. Our Court affirmed that stay by judgment order in June 1997.