No. 20-7665
Donald David Dillbeck v. Florida
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment death-penalty due-process evolving-standards habeas-corpus medical-evidence mental-health post-conviction post-conviction-relief scientific-advancements scientific-evidence
Latest Conference:
2021-06-03
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) What constitutes diligence in raising newly discovered medical and/or mental health evidence and diagnoses?
2) Are capital defendants confined to the medical and mental health science available at the time of their trial, or must the lower courts provide a meaningful opportunity for advancements in scientific evidence to be heard?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What constitutes diligence in raising newly discovered medical and/or mental health evidence and diagnoses?
Docket Entries
2021-06-07
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/3/2021.
2021-05-18
Reply of petitioner Donald David Dillbeck filed. (Distributed)
2021-05-06
Brief of respondent State of Florida in opposition filed.
2021-03-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2021)
Attorneys
Donald David Dillbeck
Baya M. Harrison III — Law Office of Baya Harrison, Petitioner
State of Florida
Carolyn M. Snurkowski — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent