No. 18-8630

Joseph Christopher Birdtail v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-03-29
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure discovery due-process evidentiary-hearing federal-rules-of-civil-procedure habeas-corpus habeas-proceedings ineffective-assistance-of-counsel plea-agreement plea-bargaining plea-withdrawal section-2255
Latest Conference: 2019-04-26
Question Presented (from Petition)

Is it error for a district court to deny either discovery proceedings or an evidentiary hearing under the Federal Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings in the United States District Court, when the habeas record presents conflicting factual evidence regarding the advice given to the defendant about the effects of withdrawing a plea agreement?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is it error for a district court to deny either discovery proceedings or an evidentiary hearing under the Federal Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings in the United States District Court, when the habeas record presents conflicting factual evidence regarding the advice given to the defendant about the effects of withdrawing a plea agreement?

Docket Entries

2019-04-29
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
2019-04-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
Main Document
2019-03-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 29, 2019)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionAppendixProof of Service

Attorneys

Joseph Christopher Birdtail
Colin Michael Stephens — Smith & Stephens, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent