No. 20-707
Duane Joseph Johnson v. Eric D. Wilson, Warden
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: appellate-counsel brady-standard brady-v-maryland due-process habeas habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance preponderance-standard strickland-standard strickland-v-washington
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Must a habeas petitioner asserting ineffective assistance of appellate counsel establish by a preponderance that counsel's omitted argument was meritorious?
2. Did the D.C. Circuit misapply Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) when it rejected Petitioner's claims?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Must a habeas petitioner asserting ineffective assistance of appellate counsel establish by a preponderance that counsel's omitted argument was meritorious?
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2020-12-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-02
Waiver of right of respondent Wilson, Eric to respond filed.
2020-11-23
Motion (20M40 for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the supplemental appendix under seal Granted. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
2020-11-04
MOTION (20M40) DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.
2020-10-26
Motion (20M40) for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the supplemental appendix under seal filed.
2020-10-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 23, 2020)
Attorneys
Duane Joseph Johnson
Alex Young K. Oh — Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Petitioner
Wilson, Eric
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent