CAPITAL CASE. No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DONALD WAYNE STROUTH, Petitioner. vs. ROLAND W. COLSON, Warden.
|
|
- Kerrie Bailey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 CAPITAL CASE No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DONALD WAYNE STROUTH, Petitioner vs. ROLAND W. COLSON, Warden Respondent ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT PETITIONER S REPLY TO RESPONDENT S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION Mark E. Olive Henry A. Martin Law Office of Mark E. Olive, P.A. Federal Public Defender 320 W. Jefferson Street Jerome C. Del Pino* Tallahassee, FL Assistant Federal Public Defender (850) Broadway, Suite 200 Nashville, Tennessee (615) *Counsel of Record
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Auorities i Reply Brief for Petitioner A. Petitioner s Challenge To The Application Of Cullen v. Pinholster Is Properly Before The Court Where That Decision Was The Basis Of The Court Of Appeals Refusal To Consider Petitioner s Previously Unavailable Mental Illness Evidence, Is The Subject Of A Circuit Conflict, And Conflicts Wi Recent Decisions Of This Court B. Petitioner s Martinez Claim Is Properly Before The Court And Martinez Instructs The Proper Resolution Of The Pinholster Catch CONCLUSION
3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Page(s) Ballinger v. Prelesnik, F.3d, 2013 WL (6 Cir. March 4, 2013) Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S., 131 S.Ct (2011) passim Dickens v. Ryan, 688 F.3d 1054 (9 Cir. 2012) Dickens v. Ryan, 704 F.3d 816 (9 Cir. 2013) Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982) Haynes v. Thaler, 568 U.S. (2012) Johnson v. Williams, 568 U.S. (2013) Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 596 (1978) Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S., 132 S.Ct (2012) passim Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. 30 (2009) Rompilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (2005) ,3 Schad v. Ryan, No , 2013 WL (9 Cir. Feb. 26, 2013) Sears v. Upton, 561 U.S., 130 S.Ct (2010) , 6 Smi v. Colson, U.S. No State v. Sluder, No. 1236, 1990 WL (Tenn. Crim. App. March 14, 1990) State v. Thompson, 768 S.W.2d 239 (Tenn. 1989) Strou v. State, 755 S.W.2d 819 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986) Thompson v. State, 958 S.W.2d 156 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997) Trevino v. Thaler, No , 7 Wiggins v. Smi, 539 U.S. 510 (2003) , 6 i
4 Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) , 6 Winston v. Pearson, 683 F.3d 489 (4 Cir. 2012) Woodson v. Nor Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976) STATUTES Tenn. Code Ann (1975) Tenn. Code Ann (1977) Tenn. Code Ann. (1977) Sup. Ct. R Tenn. Code Ann. (1977) Ct. App. R Tenn. R. Crim Pro ii
5 REPLY BRIEF FOR PETITIONER This court must look past Respondent s recitation of irrelevant facts to e issue at hand: in 1978, when Petitioner was placed on trial for his life at e age of 1 19, he did not get a Cadillac lawyer or even a Ford Taurus defense, but a Chevy Vega trial strategy wi bald tires, bad brakes, and no seat belts. Larry Dillow did almost noing to stand between Strou and a dea sentence, failing to do any investigation into e fact at Strou is mentally ill and brain damaged. He ignored Strou s childhood and rejected his family s offers to help. Cf. Sears v. Upton, 561 U.S., 130 S.Ct (2010)(per curiam); Rompilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (2005); Wiggins v. Smi, 539 U.S. 510 (2003); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 396 (2000). After Dillow failed to discover Strou s mental impairments, Tennessee denied Strou e funds he needed to develop e evidence in postconviction collateral review to prove Dillow s ineffectiveness. His disabilities did not come to light until is federal habeas proceeding, but now Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S., 131 S.Ct (2011), appears to preclude eir consideration. Justice requires at, where e state action of denying expert funding made e mental heal evidence unavailable in post-conviction collateral review, 1 See Kagan, Holder Address e Five Decades Since Historic Gideon Decision, March 18, 2013, at ce-historic-gideon-decision.html (visited March 22, 2013)( Kagan said e provision of a Cadillac lawyer isn't a right for poor defendants. But ey should at least have a Ford Taurus defense, complete wi a lawyer who has e skills, resources and competence necessary to oroughly advise a client. ).
6 Pinholster should not apply because it was e fault of e state not Strou at e evidence was not developed in state court. See Pinholster, 563 U.S. at, (Sotomayor, J., dissenting)(slip op. At 10). Alternatively, where Strou s mental illness evidence could only be developed initially in federal habeas proceedings, his sentencing ineffectiveness claim must be deemed a new claim for which he can demonstrate cause under is Court s intervening decision in Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S., 132 S.Ct (2012). Id. (Slip at 11). Eier way, Strou is entitled to relief. And because Respondent asserts at Martinez does not apply in Tennessee, at a minimum is Court should hold Petitioner s casse pending is Court s decision in Trevino v. Thaler, U.S. No A. Petitioner s Challenge To The Application Of Cullen v. Pinholster Is Properly Before The Court Where That Decision Was The Basis Of The Court Of Appeals Refusal To Consider Petitioner s Previously Unavailable Mental Illness Evidence, Is The Subject Of A Circuit Conflict, And Conflicts Wi Recent Decisions Of This Court Respondent asserts at Petitioner s Pinholster claim is not before e Court. Resp. pp Yet on e preceding page of his brief, Respondent quotes e very portion of e decision of court of appeals at excludes Petitioner s mental heal evidence based on Pinholster: federal courts must limit emselves to e record at was before e state court, Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S., 131 S.Ct. 1388, 1398, 179 L.Ed. 557 (2011). The new mental-heal evidence has no bearing on wheer AEDPA permits us to grant him relief on his [ineffective assistance] claim. A. 56; Resp. 7. Thus, e claim is properly before is Court and certiorari is warranted. 2
7 This is especially so in light of recent decisions of is Court at contradict e Six Circuit s decision. The court of appeals deemed e decision of e Tennessee courts on Strou s Six Amendment claim an adjudication on e merits for purposes of 2254(d), even ough e state court had denied e funding necessary for Strou to present his claim and, erefore, never heard and evaluated e evidence. See Johnson v. Williams, 568 U.S., Slip Op. 12 (Feb. 20, 2013). The court of appeals decision here us conflicts directly wi is Court s recent pronouncement in Johnson about what constitutes an adjudication on e merits to which Pinhiolster would apply. In fact, is Court also recently denied certiorari in a case in which e Four Circuit held at Pinholster did not preclude federal habeas relief by applying e very eory advocated by Strou here. Winston v. Pearson, 683 F.3d 489 (4 Cir. 2012), cert. denied 568 U.S. (2013). In sum, e Six Circuit s decision conflicts wi bo Johnson and Winston. Compare Ballinger v. Prelesnik, F.3d, 2013 WL (6 Cir. March 4, 2013) (rejecting e reasoning of Winston). Moreover, e alternative ruling of e Court of Appeals decision is so nonsensical at it must be disregarded. The appellate court endorsed e notion at e temporal removal of psychiatric assessments is grounds to disregard em, which squarely contradicts is Court s holdings, see Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. 30 (2009)(finding IAC based on psychological evidence developed 23 years after trial); Rompilla, supra (IAC based on psychological evidence developed 17 years after trial), and en implied at e state courts reached e same conclusion 3
8 (A56, as e state courts reasonably concluded in finding no prejudice ) an impossibility given at e evidence was never presented to e state courts. Finally, Respondent s argument must be rejected because it misrepresents e record. The post-conviction appellate court did not refuse to overturn e denial of funding based on Petitioner s showing in support of his request. The state court affirmed e denial of funding because it determined at Strou waived his due process inadequate pre-trial psychological assessment claim on direct appeal and he could not overcome e waiver wi a showing of ineffective assistance because he could not show prejudice wiout evidence of what a orough assessment i.e., what he sought funding for would have revealed. Strou v. State, 755 S.W.2d 819, 822 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986). The court nevereless considered e claim on e merits but denied it because of e lack of evidence. Id. at 832 ( as previously noted, ere is no proof in e record, nor even an assertion by counsel, at Strou's mental evaluation failed to turn up furer evidence at would have affected e jury's verdict in any way ). In bo rulings e state court penalized Strou for failing to show what he had requested funding in order to show. In sum, Tennessee provided Strou wi woefully ineffective trial counsel in his capital prosecution and en denied him e resources necessary to demonstrate at ineffectiveness. The strictures of e AEDPA and is Court s decision in Pinholster require federal courts to consider e state court s decision, which is based on a record whose development at court inhibited, an adjudication on e merits for purposes of habeas review. The effect is at states may hollow out e 4
9 Six Amendment and evade federal habeas correction by restricting collateral review. This subverts justice and e constitutional order, and for is reason, e Court should grant Strou s petition. B. Petitioner s Martinez Claim Is Properly Before The Court And Martinez Instructs The Proper Resolution Of The Pinholster Catch- 22 Respondent also contends at Petitioner s claim based on Martinez v. Ryan is not properly before is court because Petitioner failed to preserve it below. Resp. 10. That is false. Less an two weeks after Martinez was issued, and before oral argument Strou moved e court of appeals to remand e case to e district court to apply Martinez based on its ruling at e ineffective assistance claim was defaulted because post-conviction counsel had failed to develop e evidence at gave rise to e claim. Strou v. Colson, No (Appellant s 4/3/12 motion). Having raised e argument at e earliest possible time, Strou properly preserved it for review before is Court, as it was decided during e pendency of his initial habeas appeal. Respondent's assertion at he should not be entitled to its application is frivolous. Compare Haynes v. Thaler, 568 U.S., Slip Op. at 2 (2012) (Sotomayor, J., respecting grant of stay of execution)(if Martinez applies to Texas cases, Haynes should be entitled to application of Martinez, which was decided during pendency of federal habeas appeal). Martinez acknowledged at claims like Strou s often require investigative work and an understanding of trial strategy and at petitioners like him are in no position to develop e evidentiary basis for a claim of ineffective assistance, 5
10 which often turns on evidence outside e trial record. Martinez at These facts supported e Court s conclusion at an initial-review collateral proceeding, if undertaken... wi ineffective counsel, may not [be] sufficient to ensure at proper consideration was given to a substantial claim. Id. The same eory at underlies e equitable exception of Martinez indicates e remedy for e Pinholster Catch-22 in is case. 2 Strou s substantial ineffective assistance claim required investigative work and an understanding of trial strategy. The evidence at supports his claim was previously unavailable because of state action, just as Justice Sotomayor hypoesized in her dissent in Pinholster. See Pet Therefore, is Court s acknowledgment in Martinez at state action could impair a post-conviction petitioner s ability to litigate a substantial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, viz. failure to appoint counsel or appointment of ineffective counsel in initial opportunity collateral review proceedings, must extend to e state action denial of funding at denied Strou s opportunity to develop his evidence. See Dickens v. Ryan, 688 F.3d 1054 (9 Cir. 2012)(deeming newly presented evidence of ineffectiveness a new claim whose default could be overcome under Martinez), rehearing en banc granted, Dickens v. Ryan, 704 F.3d 816 (9 Cir. 2013); Schad v. Ryan, No , 2013 WL (9 Cir. Feb. 26, 2013). 2 See Sears v. Upton, 130 S.Ct 3259 (2010); Wiggins v. Smi, 539 U.S. 510 (2003); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 396 (2000); Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104, 112 (1982); Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 596 (1978); Woodson v. Nor Carolina, 428 U.S. 280, 304 (1976). 6
11 Notwistanding e applicability of Martinez, Respondent also alleges at Martinez does not apply in Tennessee, which, he asserts, allow[s] (but do[es] not encourage) ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims to be raised on direct appeal. Resp. 10. These arguments are similar to ose made by e state in Trevino v. Thaler, 568 U.S. (2012)(U.S. No ). In fact, Tennessee s statutes, rules of court and procedure, and e decisions of e Court of Criminal Appeals all channeled Petitioner s ineffectiveness claims into post-conviction collateral proceedings. See Tenn. Code Ann (1975)(requiring appointed counsel to represent a defendant at all stages of e proceedings before e court which appointed e attorney and also upon any appeal from e judgment of e court which imposes a prison sentence ); Tenn. Code Ann. (1977) Sup. Ct. R. 44 (same); Tenn. Code Ann. (1977) Ct. App. R. 12 (any issue not included in motion for a new trial is deemed waived on direct appeal); 1978 Tenn. R. Crim Pro. 33 (new trial motion must be made wiin 30 days); Tenn. Code Ann (1977)(same); 1978 Tenn. R. Crim Pro. 33(c)(trial court has sole discretion to hold hearing on a new trial motion); State v. Thompson, 768 S.W.2d 239, 245 (Tenn. 1989)(refusing to consider IAC claim on direct appeal) ( ese [] questions are more appropriately raised by oer counsel when e present attorneys are relieved of eir advocacy role ); State v. Sluder, No. 1236, 1990 WL (Tenn. Crim. App. March 14, 1990)(IAC claim raised on direct appeal a practice fraught wi peril was waived because it was not included in new trial motion); Thompson v. State, 958 S.W.2d 156 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997)( An appellant [raising IAC on direct 7
12 appeal] runs e risk of having e issue resolved wiout an evidentiary hearing which, if held, might be e only way at harm could be shown a prerequisite for relief in ineffective trial counsel claims )(internal quotations and citations omitted). This Court anticipated ese very circumstances in Martinez. 132 S.Ct. at 1318 ( Ineffective-assistance claims often depend on evidence outside e record. Direct appeals, wiout evidentiary hearings, may not be as effective as oer proceedings for developing e factual basis of a claim. Abbreviated deadlines to expand e record on direct appeal may not allow adequate time for an attorney to investigate e ineffective assistance claim. ). Given e conflict between Respondent s assertions and Tennessee s statutes, rules, and court decisions, and at e pending decision in Trevino will address nearly identical questions as to wheer Martinez applies under e circumstances presented here, short of granting Strou's petition, is Court should hold is petition pending Trevino and en grant e petition, vacate, and remand for e court of appeals to properly apply Trevino and Martinez in e first instance. See Smi v. Colson, U.S. No (cert. pending)(tennessee capital case apparently being held pending Trevino). 8
13 CONCLUSION For e foregoing reasons and ose stated in e petition, e petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted. Respectfully submitted, Mark E. Olive Law Office of Mark E. Olive, P.A. 320 W. Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL Henry A. Martin Federal Public Defender Jerome C. Del Pino* Assistant Federal Public Defender 810 Broadway Suite 200 Nashville, TN By: *counsel of record 9
14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify at a copy of e foregoing petition for writ of certiorari was served is 25 day of March, 2013, upon counsel for Respondent, Mr. James E. Gaylord, 425 Fif Avenue Nor, Nashville, Tennessee Jerome C. Del Pino 10
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 14 191 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CHARLES L. RYAN, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTONS, VS. RICHARD D. HURLES, Petitioner, Respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
More informationIn The Supreme Court of the United States
No. 12-492 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- EDDIE L. PEARSON,
More informationStrickland v. Washington 466 U.S. 668 (1984), still control claims of
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Does the deficient performance/resulting prejudice standard of Strickland v. Washington 466 U.S. 668 (1984), still control claims of ineffective assistance of post-conviction
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. JESSE JOE HERNANDEZ, PETITIONER, vs. No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JESSE JOE HERNANDEZ, PETITIONER, vs. No. 3:06-CV-846-P NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 12 11 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CHARLES L. RYAN, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, VS. STEVEN CRAIG JAMES, Petitioner, Respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
NO. 11-981 In the Supreme Court of the United States NICHOLAS TODD SUTTON, Petitioner, v. ROLAND COLSON, WARDEN, Respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
More informationNo. CAPITAL CASE Execution Scheduled: October 11, 2018, at 7:00 CST IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. EDMUND ZAGORSKI, Respondent,
No. CAPITAL CASE Execution Scheduled: October 11, 2018, at 7:00 CST IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES EDMUND ZAGORSKI, Respondent, v. TONY MAYS, Warden, Applicant. APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY OF
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cv JDW-EAJ. versus
Kenneth Stewart v. Secretary, FL DOC, et al Doc. 1108737375 Att. 1 Case: 14-11238 Date Filed: 12/22/2015 Page: 1 of 15 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No.
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: JULY 6, 2012; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2011-CA-001232-MR BRAD DENNY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM MCCREARY CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE RODERICK MESSER,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 537 U. S. (2002) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested
More informationCOMPETENCE TO STAND TRIAL: UNSUCCESSFUL BUT INSTRUCTIVE CASES Updated July 2009
COMPETENCE TO STAND TRIAL: UNSUCCESSFUL BUT INSTRUCTIVE CASES Updated July 2009 I. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT Indiana v. Edwards, 128 S.Ct. 2379 (2008) The Constitution does not forbid States from insisting
More informationPetitioner, Respondent.
No. 16-5294 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JAMES EDMOND MCWILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON S. DUNN, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Respondent. On Petition for
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-70015 Document: 00513434126 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 22, 2016 CARLOS
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 07a0585n.06 Filed: August 14, Case No
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 07a0585n.06 Filed: August 14, 2007 Case No. 03-5681 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT RONNIE LEE BOWLING, Petitioner-Appellant, v.
More informationCase: Document: 38-2 Filed: 06/01/2016 Page: 1. NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0288n.06. Case No.
Case: 14-2093 Document: 38-2 Filed: 06/01/2016 Page: 1 NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0288n.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ARTHUR EUGENE SHELTON, Petitioner-Appellant,
More informationSupreme Court of the Unitez State
No. 09-461 ~n ~ he -- ~,veme Court, U.$. IOJAN 2 0 2010 -~ r: D Supreme Court of the Unitez State FFIC~- ~ ~ ~ CLERK STEPHEN MICHAEL WEST, Petitioner, RICKY BELL, Warden, Respondent. On Petition For A
More informationMiguel Gonzalez v. Superintendent Graterford SCI
2016 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-19-2016 Miguel Gonzalez v. Superintendent Graterford SCI Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2016
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
RECOMMENDED FOR FULLTEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 11a0090p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT BILLY RAY IRICK, PetitionerAppellant, X v. RICKY J. BELL,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No KENNETH WAYNE MORRIS, versus
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 04-70004 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk KENNETH WAYNE MORRIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
More informationFEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS PETITIONS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2254
FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS PETITIONS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2254 Meredith J. Ross 2011 Clinical Professor of Law Director, Frank J. Remington Center University of Wisconsin Law School 1) Introduction Many inmates
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE May 9, 2005 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE May 9, 2005 Session RALPH ALLEY, ET AL., v. QUEBECOR WORLD KINGSPORT, INC., d/n/a QUEBECOR WORLD HAWKINS, INC. Direct Appeal from e Circuit Court for Hawkins
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Case: 14-1341 Document: 31 Filed: 04/11/2014 Page: 1 APRIL DEBOER, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT -vs- 6 Cir #14-1341 ED Mi #12-civ-10285 RICHARD SNYDER,
More informationNo. IN THE DONALD KARR, Petitioner, STATE OF INDIANA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari To the Indiana Supreme Court
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DONALD KARR, Petitioner, v. STATE OF INDIANA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari To the Indiana Supreme Court PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA. Respondents. Petitioner, Gerald Carter (hereafter, the petitioner ), is a state prisoner
Carter v. State of Sou Carolina et al Doc. 5 6:05-cv-02851-TLW Date Filed 10/06/2005 Entry Number 5 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Gerald Stephon Carter, #175348; vs.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 08-598 In the Supreme Court of the United States DAVID BOBBY, WARDEN, v. Petitioner, MICHAEL BIES, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT REPLY
More informationREPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER-APPELLANT
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Appeal No. 04-3946 (Case No. 00-C-0650 (E.D. Wis.)) WARREN GOODMAN, v. Petitioner-Appellant, DANIEL BERTRAND, Warden, Green Bay Correctional Institution,
More informationNo. 49,116-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * * * * * * * By: C. A. Martin, III * * * * *
Judgment rendered July 9, 2014. Application for rehearing may be filed wiin e delay allowed by Art. 2166, LSA-CCP. No. 49,116-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * LANDFORD ANTHONY
More informationNo. 77,610. [January 16, 19921
0 L No. 77,610 KENNETH DARCELL QUINCE, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [January 16, 19921 PER CURIAM, Quince appeals the trial court's summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief.
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 15-187 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States LOUIS CASTRO PEREZ, v. Petitioner, WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION, Respondent.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Scaife v. Falk et al Doc. 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 12-cv-02530-BNB VERYL BRUCE SCAIFE, v. Applicant, FRANCIS FALK, and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ARMANDONUNEZv. UNITEDSTATES
. -.. -.. - -. -...- -........+_.. -.. Cite as: 554 U. S._ (2008) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ARMANDONUNEZv. UNITEDSTATES ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 529 U. S. (2000) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 556 U. S. (2009) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 583 U. S. (2017) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES MATTHEW REEVES v. ALABAMA ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA No. 16 9282. Decided November 13,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 543 U. S. (2004) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES LAROYCE LATHAIR SMITH v. TEXAS ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS No. 04 5323. Decided November
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 21, 2010 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 21, 2010 Session GERARDO GOMEZ v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Knox County No. 94604 Mary Beth Leibowitz, Judge
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. v. Case No BC Honorable David M. Lawson CAROL HOWES,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION JAMES SIMPSON, Petitioner, v. Case No. 01-10307-BC Honorable David M. Lawson CAROL HOWES, Respondent. / OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING
More informationTHE DUTY OF COMPETENCY FOR APPELLATE LAWYERS Post-Conviction Motions and the Criminal Appeal
THE DUTY OF COMPETENCY FOR APPELLATE LAWYERS Post-Conviction Motions and the Criminal Appeal ROBERT R. HENAK Henak Law Office, S.C. 1223 North Prospect Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 (414) 283-9300
More informationCase 5:08-cv KS Document 17 Filed 06/12/09 Page 1 of 28
Case 5:08-cv-00275-KS Document 17 Filed 06/12/09 Page 1 of 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION JEFFREY HAVARD PETITIONER V. CIVIL ACTION NO.:
More informationNo IN THE ~upreme ~aurt af t~ ~nitel~ gbt~te~ ED BUSS, in his official capacity as Superintendent of the Indiana State Prison,
No. 07-1016 IN THE ~upreme ~aurt af t~ ~nitel~ gbt~te~ ED BUSS, in his official capacity as Superintendent of the Indiana State Prison, V. Petitioner, CHRISTOPHER M. STEVENS, Respondent. On Petition for
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
133 Nev., Advance Opinion I I IN THE THE STATE GUILLERMO RENTERIA-NOVOA, Appellant, vs. THE STATE, Respondent. No. 68239 FILED MAR 3 0 2017 ELIZABETH A BROWN CLERK By c Vi DEPUT1s;CtrA il Appeal from a
More informationSTEVE HENLEY, RICKY BELL, Warden, PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES STEVE HENLEY, Petitioner, vs. RICKY BELL, Warden, Respondent. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION RICHARD HAMBLEN ) ) v. ) No. 3:08-1034 ) JUDGE CAMPBELL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) MEMORANDUM I. Introduction Pending before
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida PER CURIAM. No. SC17-878 MILO A. ROSE, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [July 19, 2018] Discharged counsel appeals the postconviction court s order granting Milo A. Rose
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION ORDER
BRYANT v. TAYLOR Doc. 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION CARNEL BRYANT, Petitioner, v. Case No. CV416-077 CEDRIC TAYLOR, Respondent. ORDER Carnel Bryant petitions
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 21, 2010
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 21, 2010 TIMMY REAGAN v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Overton County No. 4594 David A. Patterson,
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs December 20, 2005
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs December 20, 2005 LARRY DOTSON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE, RICKY BELL, WARDEN Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE May 23, 2014 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE May 23, 2014 Session WILLIAM D. STALKER, ET AL. v. DAVID R. NUTTER, ET AL. Appeal from e Chancery Court for Sumner County No. 2008C1 Tom E. Gray, Chancellor
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 18, 2010
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 18, 2010 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. LATOYA T. WALLER Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2005-D-2715 J.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 15-1054 In the Supreme Court of the United States CURTIS SCOTT, PETITIONER v. ROBERT A. MCDONALD, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationfor the boutbern Aisuttt Of deorata
Ware v. Flournoy Doc. 19 the Eniteb State itrid Court for the boutbern Aisuttt Of deorata 38runabick fltbiion KEITH WARE, * * Petitioner, * CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:15-cv-84 * V. * * J.V. FLOURNOY, * * Respondent.
More informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. BRENT RAY BREWER, Petitioner,
No. 05-11287 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BRENT RAY BREWER, Petitioner, v. NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent.
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 89 1
Article 89. Motion for Appropriate Relief and Other Post-Trial Relief. 15A-1411. Motion for appropriate relief. (a) Relief from errors committed in the trial division, or other post-trial relief, may be
More informationAll about Booker. By Alan Ellis and James H. Feldman, Jr. 1.
All about Booker By Alan Ellis and James H. Feldman, Jr. 1 www.alanellis.com On January 12, 2005, e Supreme Court announced its muchanticipated opinion in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. --, 125 S.Ct.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No P. versus. WARDEN, Respondent Appellee.
Case: 17-14027 Date Filed: 04/03/2018 Page: 1 of 10 KEITH THARPE, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 17-14027-P versus Petitioner Appellant, WARDEN, Respondent Appellee.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MONROE DIVISION
Hill v. Dixon Correctional Institute Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MONROE DIVISION DWAYNE J. HILL, aka DEWAYNE HILL CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-1819 LA. DOC #294586 VS. SECTION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Criminal No. 5:06-CR-136-1D Civil No.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Criminal No. 5:06-CR-136-1D Civil No. 5:08-CV-425-1D KEVIN LESLIE GEDDINGS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) GOVERNMENT'S MEMORANDUM
More informationF I L E D May 29, 2012
Case: 11-70021 Document: 00511869515 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/29/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D May 29, 2012 Lyle
More informationChristopher Jones v. PA Board Probation and Parole
2012 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-25-2012 Christopher Jones v. PA Board Probation and Parole Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket
More informationRICHARD L. DUGGER, etc., Respondent. [March 31, 19941
Nos. 74,194 & 77,645 SONNY BOY OATS, Petitioner, vs. RICHARD L. DUGGER, etc., Respondent. SONNY BOY OATS, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [March 31, 19941 PER CURIAM. Sonny Boy Oats, a prisoner
More informationNo P UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CAPITAL CASE DOYLE LEE HAMM, Petitioner-Appellant, RICHARD ALLEN,
No. 13-14376-P UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CAPITAL CASE DOYLE LEE HAMM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. RICHARD ALLEN, Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Anthony Butler v. K. Harrington Doc. 9026142555 Case: 10-55202 06/24/2014 ID: 9142958 DktEntry: 84 Page: 1 of 11 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANTHONY BUTLER, Petitioner-Appellant,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2016 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus
More informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
No. 16-9604 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
More informationETHICS AND APPELLATE PRACTICE
ETHICS AND APPELLATE PRACTICE Presented by Paul M. Rashkind Supervisory Assistant Federal Public Defender Chief, Appellate Division, Southern District of Florida I. Ethics of Initiating a Criminal Appeal
More informationNo IN THE STEPHEN MICHAEL WEST, RICKY BELL, WARDEN,
FEB -2 2010 No. 09-461 IN THE STEPHEN MICHAEL WEST, Petitioner, Vo RICKY BELL, WARDEN, Respondent. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Sixth Circuit REPLY
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 14-1153 In the Supreme Court of the United States EDMUND LACHANCE, v. Petitioner, MASSACHUSETTS, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts REPLY
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC14-1053 JOHN RUTHELL HENRY, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [June 12, 2014] PER CURIAM. John Ruthell Henry is a prisoner under sentence of death for whom a warrant
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida PER CURIAM. No. SC06-1966 DANNY HAROLD ROLLING, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [October 18, 2006] Danny Harold Rolling, a prisoner under sentence of death and an active
More informationCase 8:01-cr DKC Document 129 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Case 8:01-cr-00566-DKC Document 129 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JOSEPHINE VIRGINIA GRAY : : v. : Civil Action No. DKC 09-0532 Criminal Case
More informationLAWRENCE v. FLORIDA: APPLICATIONS FOR POST- CONVICTION RELIEF ARE PENDING UNDER THE AEDPA ONLY UNTIL FINAL JUDGMENT IN STATE COURT
LAWRENCE v. FLORIDA: APPLICATIONS FOR POST- CONVICTION RELIEF ARE PENDING UNDER THE AEDPA ONLY UNTIL FINAL JUDGMENT IN STATE COURT ELIZABETH RICHARDSON-ROYER* I. INTRODUCTION On February 20, 2007, the
More informationON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
No. 16-6316 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES November 2, 2016 MICHAEL DAMON RIPPO, Petitioner, V. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
More informationNo CAPITAL CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. THOMAS D. ARTHUR, Petitioner, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent.
No. 16-595 CAPITAL CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES THOMAS D. ARTHUR, Petitioner, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Alabama Supreme Court BRIEF
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LEXINGTON CIVIL ACTION NO WOB PLAINTIFFS COMBINED SUR-REPLY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LEXINGTON CIVIL ACTION NO. 98-431-WOB KEITH RENE GUY, SR., et al PLAINTIFFS VS. LEXINGTON-FAYETTE URBAN COUNTY GOVERNMENT, et al DEFENDANTS
More informationFollow this and additional works at:
2004 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-21-2004 Gates v. Lavan Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 03-1764 Follow this and additional
More informationNo ~n ~up~eme ~ourt of t~e ~n~teb ~tate~ JERI-ANN SHERRY Petitioner, WILLIAM D. JOHNSON Respondent.
JUL! 3 ~I0 No. 09-1342 ~n ~up~eme ~ourt of t~e ~n~teb ~tate~ JERI-ANN SHERRY Petitioner, Vo WILLIAM D. JOHNSON Respondent. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION
Seumanu v. Davis Doc. 0 0 ROPATI A SEUMANU, v. Plaintiff, RON DAVIS, Warden, San Quentin State Prison, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION Case No. -cv-0-rs
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION
1 1 1 1 1 1 THOMAS P. O BRIEN United States Attorney CHRISTINE C. EWELL Assistant United States Attorney Chief, Criminal Division CHRISTOPHER BRUNWIN Assistant United States Attorney Deputy Chief, Violent
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC11-100 WILLIAM T. TURNER, vs. Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ON REVIEW OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
McPhail v. LYFT, INC. Doc. 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION JENNIFER MCPHAIL A-14-CA-829-LY LYFT, INC. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES
More informationIn The Supreme Court Of The United States
No. 14-95 In The Supreme Court Of The United States PATRICK GLEBE, SUPERINTENDENT STAFFORD CREEK CORRECTIONS CENTER, v. PETITIONER, JOSHUA JAMES FROST, RESPONDENT. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
Rel:05/29/2009 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 17-394 In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, PETITIONER v. JERRY HARTFIELD ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
More informationWILLIAM J. OLSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Case: 19-1268 Document: 14 Filed: 03/21/2019 Page: 1 WILLIAM J. OLSON (VA, D.C.) HERBERT W. TITUS (VA OF COUNSEL) JEREMIAH L. MORGAN (D.C., CA ONLY) ROBERT J. OLSON (VA, D.C.) WILLIAM J. OLSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. Petitioner, CASE NO. SC v. Lower Tribunal No CF MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Filing # 61260007 E-Filed 09/01/2017 01:47:46 PM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CARY MICHAEL LAMBRIX, Petitioner, CASE NO. SC17-1608 v. Lower Tribunal No. 83-12-CF RECEIVED, 09/01/2017 01:48:26 PM, Clerk,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit February 26, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT KEISHA DESHON GLOVER, Petitioner - Appellant, No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE January 3, 2001 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE January 3, 2001 Session DEXTER L. WILLIAMS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal By Permission from the Court of Criminal Appeals Criminal Court for Blount County
More information~3n ~e ~reme ~ourt of ~e ~Inite~ ~tate~
No. 06-1646 ~3n ~e ~reme ~ourt of ~e ~Inite~ ~tate~ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PETITIONER V. GINO GONZAGA RODRIQUEZ ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH
More informationIAC SURVIVAL GUIDE. Detecting, Avoiding and Addressing Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims
IAC SURVIVAL GUIDE Detecting, Avoiding and Addressing Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims The Lodestar: Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668 (1984) A criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right
More informationS e n t e n c i n g P a r t n e r s
Published By Joaquin & Duncan, L.L.C.; A Law Firm of Federal Sentencing Attorneys July 2016 S e n t e n c i n g P a r t n e r s About Sentencing Partners: Sentencing Partners is published by Joaquin and
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 22, 2007
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 22, 2007 WILLIAM MATNEY PUTMAN v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Carter County No. S18111
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 17, 2018 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 17, 2018 Session 08/27/2018 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. COREY FOREST Appeal from the Circuit Court for Maury County No. 24034 Robert L. Jones,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC L.T. No. CF A-XX. MICAH NELSON Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA Appellee.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC08-1965 L.T. No. CF-97-06806A-XX MICAH NELSON Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 10 TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT FOR POLK
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 15-1174 In the Supreme Court of the United States MARLON SCARBER, PETITIONER v. CARMEN DENISE PALMER ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 12-1190 MAY n n -. ' wi y b AIA i-eaersl P ublic Def. --,-icj habeas Unit "~^upf5n_courrosr ~ FILED MAY 1-2013 OFFICE OF THE CLERK IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES " : " ;".';.", > '*,-T.
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 16-6795 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States CARLOS MANUEL AYESTAS, v. Petitioner, LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE (INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION), Respondent. On Writ of
More informationIn The Supreme Court of the United States
No. 13-775 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- JEFFERY LEE, v.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Scott v. Cain Doc. 920100202 Case: 08-30631 Document: 00511019048 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/02/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 13-1333 In the Supreme Court of the United States TODD TOLLEFSON, ET AL. BERTINA BOWERMAN, ET AL. STEVEN DYKEHOUSE, ET AL. AARON J. VROMAN, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
More information