No. 18-5787
Danyale Sharron Tubbs v. Michigan
IFP
Tags: competency competency-defense due-process ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mental-competency mental-illness plain-error procedural-default sentencing sentencing-error strickland-standard
Latest Conference:
2018-10-26
Question Presented (from Petition)
WAS MICHIGAN'S APPLICATION OF STRICKLAND V WASHINGTON UNREASONABLE WHERE DEFENSE COUNSEL FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND PRESNT A COMPETENCY DEFENSE IN LIGHT OF MR. TUBBS' HISTORY OF MENTAL ILLNESS AND HIS BIZARRE BEHAVIOR PRIOR TO TRIAL AND FAILED TO OBJECT TO THE USE OF INACCURATE INFORMATION TO FASHION MR. TUBBS' SENTENCE?
H. WAS TRIAL COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO OBJECT TO THE USE OF INACCURATE INFORMATION PLAIN ERROR SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME A PROCEDURAL DEFAULT?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was Michigan's application of Strickland v. Washington unreasonable?
Docket Entries
2018-10-29
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.
2018-08-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 27, 2018)
Attorneys
Danyale Sharron Tubbs
Danyale Sharron Tubbs — Petitioner