No. 20-5802
Timothy W. Saunders v. Terry Raybon, Warden
IFP
Tags: due-process exhausted-claim exhaustion federal-habeas federal-habeas-review martinez-v-ryan merits-adjudication post-conviction post-conviction-relief procedural-default state-court-deference state-court-proceedings
Latest Conference:
2020-11-13
Question Presented (from Petition)
What deference, if any, is due to a state court decision on an exhausted post-conviction claim when the decision arises from a system that does not give the petitioner a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim and the federal courts do not give the petitioner a chance to cure default, but consider such a claim adjudicated on the merits?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What deference, if any, is due to a state court decision on an exhausted post-conviction claim when the decision arises from a system that does not give the petitioner a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim and the federal courts do not give the petitioner a chance to cure default, but consider such a claim adjudicated on the merits?
Docket Entries
2020-11-16
Petition DENIED.
2020-10-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.
2020-10-29
Reply of petitioner Timothy Saunders filed. (Distributed)
2020-10-15
Brief of respondent Terry Raybon, Warden in opposition filed.
2020-09-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 26, 2020)
Attorneys
Terry Raybon, Warden
Timothy Saunders