No. 20-6383
IFP
Tags: fourteenth-amendment ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mitigation-evidence prejudice-assessment rompilla sixth-amendment strickland-standard wiggins williams
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the Missouri Supreme Court's total deference to counsel's "deliberate decisions" without considering their actual reasonableness amounts to an irrebuttable presumption of effectiveness, violating Strickland, and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?
2. Whether the Missouri Supreme Court's application of a prejudice assessment that ignores the "one juror" test, never considers the totality of the evidence, and imposes a nexus requirement between the new mitigating evidence and the crime, violates Strickland, and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Missouri Supreme Court's application of Strickland violated the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-02-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-02-02
Reply of petitioner Vincent McFadden filed. (Distributed)
2021-01-20
Brief of respondent Missouri in opposition filed.
2020-12-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 21, 2020 to January 20, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-12-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 20, 2021.
2020-11-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 21, 2020)
Attorneys
Missouri
Shaun J. Mackelprang — Missouri Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Vincent McFadden
Laurence Edward Komp — Petitioner