No. 18-6593
Sigifredo Molina-Varela v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel motion-for-severance prejudice prejudicial-error right-to-counsel severance sixth-amendment
Latest Conference:
2018-12-07
Question Presented (from Petition)
DID THE DEFENSE COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO FILE A MOTION FOR SEVERANCE CREATE A SIGNIFICANT PREJUDICE AGAINST THE PETITIONER THEREBY CONSTITUTING INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN VIOLATION OF THE SIXTH AMENDMENT.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the defense counsel's failure to file a motion for severance create a significant prejudice against the petitioner thereby constituting ineffective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?
Docket Entries
2018-12-10
Petition DENIED. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2018-11-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.
2018-11-15
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-09-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2018)
Attorneys
Sigifredo Molina-Varela
Sigifredo Molina-Varela — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent