No. 19-7359
Danny Guzman-Correa v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process evidentiary-hearing ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel jury-consultant lafler-v-cooper missouri-v-frye prejudice public-trial public-trial-violation
Latest Conference:
2020-02-21
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether reasonable jurist could find it debatable
that Petitioner's public-trial violation warranted ..
reversal at the minimum for an evidentiary hearing
based on the Governments concession that one was then
necessary to determine prejudice after the District
court precluded Petitioner's retained jury consultant
from attending the trial ?
2. Whether a reasonable jurist could find it debatable
counsel provided bad advice to stand trial, rather than
plead guilty under Lafler v. Cooper / Missouri v. Frye, ?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether reasonable jurist could find it debatable that Petitioner's public-trial violation warranted reversal at the minimum for an evidentiary hearing
Docket Entries
2020-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2020-02-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-01-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 21, 2020)
Attorneys
Danny Guzman-Correa
Danny Guzman-Correa — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent