No. 20-7429
William Davis v. David Shinn, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeals-process constitutional-rights criminal-procedure guilty-plea habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mental-examination mental-health post-conviction-relief
Latest Conference:
2021-04-30
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a reasonable jurist could debate whether Petitioner made a substantial claim where: i) Counsel failed to move for mental examination for plead guilty; 2) Counsel failed to advise Petitioner of an insanity defense or alternatively failed to adequately investigate the circumstances that led to the offense.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a reasonable COVID-19 debate
Docket Entries
2021-08-23
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-07-29
DISTRIBUTED.
2021-05-28
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2021-05-03
Petition DENIED.
2021-04-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.
2021-03-24
Waiver of right of respondent David Shinn to respond filed.
2021-02-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 12, 2021)
Attorneys
David Shinn
J. D. Nielsen — Arizona Attorney General's Office, Respondent
William Davis
William Davis — Petitioner