No. 21-5961
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: appeal-waiver appellate-procedure constitutional-interpretation criminal-procedure due-process garza-v-idaho ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel procedural-rule sixth-amendment state-appellate-procedure
Latest Conference:
2022-02-25
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
To clarify if what the United States Court held in Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S. 10 (2019) applies to Ohio App. R. 26 (B)(1) which requires a defendant to prove ineffective assistance of counsel to reopen an appeal that was originally denied based on an appeal waiver.
A state appellate procedure is in conflict with the Court precedent set in Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S._(2019).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the holding in Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S. 10 (2019) applies to Ohio App. R. 26(B)(1) which requires a defendant to prove ineffective assistance of counsel to reopen an appeal that was originally denied based on an appeal waiver
Docket Entries
2022-02-28
Rehearing DENIED.
2022-02-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/25/2022.
2022-01-14
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-10-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 15, 2021)
Attorneys
David K. Horsley
David K. Horsley — Petitioner