No. 21-6481
General Grant Wilson v. Wisconsin
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process evidence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel prejudice standing third-party-perpetrator wisconsin-law
Latest Conference:
2022-03-18
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the limitations that Wisconsin places on a criminal defendant seeking to introduce third-party-perpetrator evidence are consistent with the Due Process Clause.
2. Whether the standard applied by Wisconsin in assessing prejudice for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in the context of a third-party perpetrator defense is constitutional.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the limitations that Wisconsin places on a criminal defendant seeking to introduce evidence are consistent with the Due Process Clause
Docket Entries
2022-03-21
Petition DENIED.
2022-02-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/18/2022.
2022-02-16
Reply of petitioner General Grant Wilson filed.
2022-02-07
Brief of respondent Wisconsin in opposition filed.
2022-01-10
Response Requested. (Due February 9, 2022)
2021-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022.
2021-12-07
Waiver of right of respondent Wisconsin to respond filed.
2021-11-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 3, 2022)
2021-10-22
Application (21A96) granted by Justice Barrett extending the time to file until November 29, 2021.
2021-10-19
Application (21A96) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 9, 2021 to December 19, 2021, submitted to Justice Barrett.
Attorneys
General Grant Wilson
Joseph Dinneen Kearney — Appellate Consulting Group, Petitioner
State of Wisconsin
John Arthur Blimling — Wisconsin Department of Justice, Respondent
Wisconsin
Sonya Bice — Wisconsin Department of Justice, Respondent