No. 19-5504
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: adversarial-testing conviction-integrity criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus incarceration ineffective-assistance-of-counsel judicial-review right-to-counsel
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER DENIAL OF APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL TO PETITIONER BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THIS INSTANT CASE, WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO PETITIONER JOEL DIAZ HINIRIO, FACING INCARCERATION ON A CONVICTION THAT HAS NEVER BEEN SUBJECTED TO "THE CRUCIBLE OF MEANINGFUL ADVERSARIAL TESTING.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether denial of appointment of counsel to petitioner would be tantamount to petitioner facing incarceration on a conviction that has never been subjected to the crucible of meaningful adversarial testing
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-06-19
Petition for a writ of prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 9, 2019)
Attorneys
In Re Joel Diaz-Hinirio
Joel Diaz-Hinirio — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent