No. 19-7890
Kevin Michael-Ferdinand Richards v. Michigan
IFP
Tags: abuse-of-discretion coercion constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process effective-assistance effective-assistance-of-counsel plea-coercion plea-understanding plea-withdrawal trial-court-discretion
Key Terms:
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-05-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
I.
Did The TriAl Court Abuse It's Discretion When It Denied
Pla WithdrAwal Under MCR 6.3IOcB); Mr. RicHaRds HAs
A Due Process Right To PleA Withdrawal Where He Was
Denied His Right To The Effective Assistance Of Consel,
The Plea Was Not Understanding, And the Plea Was
Coerced?
II. Does Mr Richards Have A Due Process Right To Plea
Withdrawal When He Was Denied His Rignt To The
Effective Assistance Of Counsel, The Plea Was Not
Understanding, And The Plea Was Coerced?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did The Trial Court Abuse Its Discretion When It Denied Plea Withdrawal Under MCR 6.310(B)?
Docket Entries
2020-05-04
Petition DENIED.
2020-04-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/1/2020.
2020-02-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 6, 2020)
Attorneys
Richards Kevin Michael-Ferdinand
Kevin Richards — Petitioner