No. 19-7886
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: certificate-of-appealability constitutional-claim constitutional-review custodial-interrogation district-court effective-assistance-of-counsel functional-equivalent-of-interrogation judicial-disagreement legal-standard magistrate-judge miranda-v-arizona right-to-silence substantial-showing
Latest Conference:
2020-04-03
Question Presented (from Petition)
The question presented, then, is whether the lower courts err in failing to find that a defendant made a substantial showing that jurists of reason could disagree on a constitutional issue when the magistrate judge and district court judged reached opposite conclusions.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the lower courts erred in failing to find that a defendant made a substantial showing that jurists of reason could disagree on a constitutional issue when the magistrate judge and district court reached opposite conclusions
Docket Entries
2020-04-06
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/3/2020.
2020-03-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-03-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 6, 2020)
Attorneys
Dennis Mahon
Jeffrey Michael Brandt — Robinson & Brandt, P.S.C., Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent