No. 21-1090
Tags: capital-trial constitutional-error due-process ineffective-assistance juror-impartiality postconviction-proceedings postconviction-relief presumption-of-innocence shock-cuff state-appeal
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Punishment
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Punishment
Latest Conference:
2022-05-12
Question Presented (from Petition)
Where a state's highest criminal court finds constitutional error but holds the record on direct appeal is insufficient to require reversal, does due process require that the state postconviction court afford the postconviction petitioner an opportunity to present the evidence in support of his attorney ineffectiveness claim?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Where a state's highest criminal court finds constitutional error but holds the record on direct appeal is insufficient to require reversal, does due process require that the state postconviction court afford the postconviction petitioner an opportunity to present the evidence in support of his attorney ineffectiveness claim?
Docket Entries
2022-05-16
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/12/2022.
2022-04-22
Reply of petitioner James Calvert filed. (Distributed)
2022-04-08
Brief of respondent Texas in opposition filed.
2022-03-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 8, 2022.
2022-03-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 9, 2022 to April 8, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-02-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 9, 2022)
2021-12-30
Application (21A282) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until February 3, 2022.
2021-12-17
Application (21A282) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 4, 2021 to March 5, 2021, submitted to Justice Alito.
Attorneys
James Calvert
Marc Robert Shapiro — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Petitioner
State of Texas
Tomee Morgan Heining — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent