No. 19-5069
Chapel Thompson v. Mark Garman, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Rockview, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: brady-violation buck-v-davis civil-procedure co-defendant court-of-appeals due-process habeas-corpus incriminating-evidence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel legal-standard procedural-analysis standing
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS FOLLOWED THE DICTATES OF THIS COURT'S DECISION IN BUCK V. DAVIS, EXPLAINING THAT THE COA STAGE IS NOT COEXTENSIVE WITH A MERITS ANALYIS?
WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS WENT BEYOND WHAT THE COA STAGE DICTATES WHEN IT DETERMINED THAT PETITIONER'S CLAIM RELATED TO AN INCRIMINATING LETTER PRESENTED AT TRIAL AGAINST THE ALLEGED CO-DEFENDANT WITHOUT INSTRUCTING THE JURY IT COULD NOT BE USED AGAINST PETITIONER, WAS UNTIMELY?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the court of appeals followed the dictates of this court's decision in Buck v. Davis, explaining that the COA stage is not coextensive with a merits analysis?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-07
Waiver of right of respondents Garman, Supt., Rockview, et al. to respond filed.
2019-06-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 2, 2019)
Attorneys
Chapel Thompson
Chapel Thompson — Petitioner
Garman, Supt., Rockview, et al.
Susan E. Moyer — District Attorney's Office, Respondent