No. 19-5234
Stephen P. Dowdney, Jr. v. Washington
IFP
Tags: anders-procedure anders-v-california appellate-review direct-appeal due-process effective-assistance-counsel effective-assistance-of-counsel equal-protection mccoy-v-court-of-appeals
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. DOES WASHINGTON STATE USE THE ANDERS v. CALIFORNIA (386 U.S. 738) PROCEDURE TO CIRCUMVENT A MEANINGFUL DIRECT (FIRST) APPEAL, EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION ?
2. SHOULD THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ADOPT THE STATE OF WISCONSIN'S COURT RULE REQUIRING APPOINTED COUNSEL ON APPEAL TO SUBMIT A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF WHY AN APPEAL IS IN FACT FRIVOLOUS WHEN ATTEMPTING TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL FOR THAT APPEAL AS APPROVED IN McCOY v. COURT OF APPEALS (486 U.S 429) ?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does Washington state use the Anders v. California procedure to circumvent a meaningful direct (first) appeal, effective assistance of counsel, due process and equal protection?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 19, 2019)
Attorneys
Stephen P. Dowdney
Stephen P. Dowdney Jr. — Petitioner