No. 18-9497

Lloyd E. Austin, IV v. Bridgitte Amsberry

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-05-31
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights criminal-procedure due-process evidence ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mental-competency plea-bargaining post-conviction-relief prosecutorial-misconduct sentencing
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

why petitioner the except a stipulated facks would trial plea agreement to the Worst per. Case scenerio without right trying ot trirl o he was in his mind?

why the petitioner would not be granted an appeal to the moticn of "Fitness to proced 1( his hq lawyer if it was in his Affer judge dened best interest to do DS motid the judge "Knife trial would except evidence fand petitioner as the murder if it had j evidence ch nothing to do w/the crime (case)?

jail district Attorney in lane Co. hym the would the petrtioner cale to find evidence to Knife as resent Ct. the silty has no when the to Case Knife 2 sutticance district attrney forensics why have the the didnt prove the murder 510m24420. lanye Kuift aj weapen presented ur to de wit fand on nothig petitiener has show the Krife petitioner as evidence to CCHUEt he case , but was used Appendix why the this didnt courts was never murder Sce a Facks this hard question! , and enough prove Case jo withess The no evidence proves PTJ loct.re. .asnt srls noem

why the did Court Q ines proceed Co. confinued at tishe Lane in facts trial 2 the stipulated pefitioner w/ hatf Stated Know "didnt X what he was ? the neqiatitions going plea agrcement on in Pq.13 sec of lane ary Lawyer the at time Elizabeth did his negeations that coutinved 24 proceed W when Set sceherio were as wist case stated didnt what he he understend was As transcripts (sec, 2 Guinds r stated per cout Pg. 13 Appe life to a why would petitioner agre sentence the worst Case in exchange Sceverio for few dismissed misdeameanor Charqes a bargain cr it dont constitute a reasonable plea agreement

why the of Duke Manning only real would 0 the β describses it withers Case ee DA described the Canty Sided G as aM facks triol ①uce Stiprleted when Manning 34snddo the interened actually when said the j potie the by Sccne as a betucen two teal (Appendix A) tride counsed continve didnt Seek her menta

1y federal motion yet Due proces s a Hhat pany to lookat of the state weuld a his Mental compentency issues

why did Elizabeth deny the pefitioner u reledte date 25 ot as presented a yrs, his the DA. filivg by mohan wis D a sa Iew to yet months ater allowed prkeed a J Si bis the worst of offer wekse a u (Appendix A)

hy did the DA in Lane County Sez trial that the withess Say af duke Mannin indentified the petiticner yet could not the photo line in (Appedix A) up

didut Consel in Canty continve to mental ppeal defense dftw wotion denied and nws

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Why would the petitioner accept a plea agreement to the worst case scenario without being of sound mind?

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-24
Waiver of right of respondent Bridgitte Amsberry to respond filed.
2019-03-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 1, 2019)

Attorneys

Bridgitte Amsberry
Benjamin Noah GutmanOregon Department of Justice, Respondent
Lloyd E. Austin IV
Lloyd E. Austin IV — Petitioner