No. 18-5005
Lawrence Dawkins v. Stewart Eckert, Superintendent, Wende Correctional Facility
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: brady-violation conflict-between-circuits due-process fair-trial material-evidence napue-giglio napue-violation Napue/Giglio-violation suppression-of-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is there a reasonable probability that had the Brady and Napue/Giglio violation been disclosed, the outcome of the trial would have been different?
Was There a Denial of a Fair Trial?
Were fundamental principles of due process ignored by the New York state courts in the rejection of Dawkins' Brady and Napue/Giglio claim?
Did a United States court of appeals enter a decision in conflict with the decision of another United States court of appeals on the same important matter?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is there a reasonable probability that had the Brady and Napue/Giglio violation been disclosed, the outcome of the trial would have been different?
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-27
Waiver of right of respondent Eckert to respond filed.
2017-11-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 30, 2018)
Attorneys
Eckert
Nancy Darragh Killian — Bronx District Atty.'s Office, Respondent
Lawrence Dawkins
Lawrence Dawkins — Petitioner