No. 20-6687
William James Jonas, III v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: court-appointed-counsel due-process fifth-circuit pro-se right-to-counsel sentencing sentencing-hearing sixth-amendment substitute-counsel
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
AdministrativeLaw Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding that the district court did not violate Petitioner William James Jonas, III's right to counsel, as provided by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, when it denied substitute counsel, and failed to notify Petitioner that his current court appointed counsel would remain as counsel of record, before advising him that the option other than the denied substitution was for Petitioner to proceed pro se in preparation for his sentencing hearing?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding that the district court did not violate Petitioner William James Jonas, III's right to counsel
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-01-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-12-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2021)
Attorneys
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
William James Jonas, III
George William Aristotelidis — Tower Life Building, Petitioner