No. 18-8912
Cirilo Flores v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure criminal-procedure-plea-bargaining due-process guilty-plea hill-v-lockhart ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel plea-agreement prejudice strickland-v-washington voluntary-and-intelligent-choice voluntary-plea
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Privacy
HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference:
2019-05-23
Question Presented (from Petition)
(1) WHETHER OR NOT THE GUILTY PLEA ENTERED WAS LEGAL WHENPETITIONER DID NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND, KNOW OR INTELLIGENTLY ACCEPT VOLUNTARY THE GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED BY THE UNITED STATES?
(2) WHETHER OR NOT COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR NOT REPRESENTING PETITIONER'S BEST INTEREST IN WANTING TO GO TO TRIAL, INTER ALIA, AND NOT ENTER INTO A PLEA AGREMMENT?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the guilty plea entered was legal when the petitioner did not fully understand, know or intelligently accept the voluntary guilty plea agreement
Docket Entries
2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-05-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-04-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 22, 2019)
2019-02-05
Application (18A804) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until April 5, 2019.
2019-01-29
Application (18A804) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 4, 2019 to April 5, 2019, submitted to Justice Alito.
Attorneys
Cirilo Flores
Cirilo Flores — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent