No. 21-6196
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: appeal civil-rights constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process fourteenth-amendment ineffective-assistance legal-representation right-to-appeal standing
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-03-04
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Did I.A. have a Fourteenth Amendment Right to have a District Court Judge inform him of his right to appeal?
2. Was I.A.'s trial attorney, Scott Wasserman, ineffective for not advising and consulting I.A. of his right to appeal?
3. Was I.A.'s appellate attorney, Michael Bartee, ineffective for not raising the third exception to Ortiz on I.A.'s Appeal?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did I.A. have a Fourteenth Amendment right to be informed of his right to appeal?
Docket Entries
2022-03-07
Petition DENIED.
2022-02-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/4/2022.
2022-02-09
Reply of petitioner I. A. filed. (Distributed)
2022-01-28
Brief of respondent Kansas in opposition filed.
2021-12-29
Response Requested. (Due January 28, 2022)
2021-12-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-06
Waiver of right of respondent Kansas to respond filed.
2021-09-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 6, 2021)
Attorneys
I. A.
Isaac Allen — Petitioner
Kansas
Brant M. Laue — Solicitor General of Kansas, Respondent