No. 21-6441
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 4th-amendment attorney-performance constitutional-rights criminal-procedure ineffective-assistance-of-counsel motion-to-suppress search-and-seizure strickland-standard strickland-v-washington warrantless-search
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (from Petition)
Was counsel's refusal to file a meritorious, dispositive motion to suppress the fruits of a warrantless search unreasonable under Strickland v. Washington, particularly when her client truthfully notified her of facts establishing the unlawfulness of that search and counsel did nothing to investigate the issue?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was counsel's refusal to file a meritorious, dispositive motion to suppress the fruits of a warrantless search unreasonable under Strickland v. Washington
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-11-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 30, 2021)
Attorneys
Sonny Scott
Celia Rhoads — Federal Public Defender - EDLA, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent