No. 18-6623

Carlos Cosme v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-11-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 criminal-procedure criminal-procedure-plea-bargaining effective-assistance-of-counsel evidentiary-hearing ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel motion-to-withdraw plea-agreement plea-bargaining sixth-amendment standard-of-review
Latest Conference: 2019-01-04
Question Presented (from Petition)

Did the District Court Commit Error in Applying the Standard of review for Motions to Withdraw a Plea Agreement as to an Issue of a Question of the Effective Assistance of Counsel in a Violation of the Sixth Amendment Rights Guaranteed as to the Advice of said Counsel in deciding Whether to Accept or Reject the Government's Offer, in a Proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ?

Did the District Court error in failing to hold an Evidentiary Hearing for Further development of the Facts in Explanation in a Proceeding Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 as to the Violation of the Right to the Effective Assistance of Counsel, as Opposed to a Proceeding on an Ambiguous Record of a Hearing Held on a Prior Motion to Withdraw a Plea Agreement under Rule 11 ?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the District Court Commit Error in Applying the Standard of review for Motions to Withdraw a Plea Agreement as to an Issue of a Question of the Effective Assistance of Counsel in a Violation of the Sixth Amendment Rights Guaranteed as to the Advice of said Counsel in deciding Whether to Accept or Reject the Government's Offer, in a Proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255

Docket Entries

2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-20
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-08-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 10, 2018)

Attorneys

Carlos Cosme
Carlos Cosme — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent