No. 18-6701

Roger Dale Epperson v. Kentucky

Lower Court: Kentucky
Docketed: 2018-11-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: client-autonomy closing-argument concession-of-guilt criminal-procedure defense-strategy ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mccoy-v-louisiana right-to-control-defense right-to-counsel sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2019-01-11
Question Presented (from Petition)

Is a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and the right to control the objective of the defense, violated, under the Court's recent decision of McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (2018), when, after settling on an innocence defense the client desired, and after informing the jury that the client is innocent, counsel concedes, during closing argument, guilt of some of the charged offenses without first informing and consulting the client?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and the right to control the objective of the defense, violated, under the Court's recent decision of McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (2018), when, after settling on an innocence defense the client desired, and after informing the jury that the client is innocent, counsel concedes, during closing argument, guilt of some of the charged offenses without first informing and consulting the client?

Docket Entries

2019-01-14
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.
2018-12-14
Reply of petitioner Roger Epperson filed.
2018-12-13
Brief of respondent Commonwealth of Kentucky in opposition filed.
2018-11-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 14, 2018)

Attorneys

Commonwealth of Kentucky
Julie Scott JerniganOffice of the Kentucky Attorney General, Respondent
Roger Epperson
David M. BarronKentucky Department of Public Advocacy, Petitioner