No. 20-8279

Kirk Cottom v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-06-11
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: brady-violation computer-logs due-process expert-evidence fabrication falsification indictment ineffective-assistance perjured-testimony perjury
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)

1) Is it a due process violation for the government to obtain an
indictment based on perjured testimony about fabricated, and
falsified computer logs?

2) Is it a Brady violation for the government to fabricate and '
falsify computer logs, then disguise them as "Expert Summary
Evidence" for trial?

3) Per this Court's decision in HINTON v. ALABAMA (2014), is
it ineffective assistance of counsel to employ incompetent
experts over the defendant's numerous objections?

4) Is it ineffective assistance of counsel to not move to exclude
material evidence that is inadmissible per FED. R. EVID 803(6)
and 803(8)?

5) Is it ineffective assistance of counsel to trick a defendant
into taking an invalid conditional plea, after being ordered
by the defendant to prepare for trial?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is it a due process violation for the government to obtain an indictment based on perjured testimony about fabricated and falsified computer logs?

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-05-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 12, 2021)

Attorneys

Kirk Cottom
Kirk Cottom — Petitioner
United States
Brian H. FletcherActing Solicitor General, Respondent