No. 21-6806
Armin Wand, III v. Gary Boughton, Warden
IFP
Tags: appellate-review certificate-of-appealability coerced-confession confession-suppression constitutional-provisions due-process manifest-injustice newly-discovered-evidence plea-withdrawal stay-of-proceedings unreliable-confession
Key Terms:
DueProcess CriminalProcedure HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess CriminalProcedure HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-03-18
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. SHOULD ARMIN WAND, III S SEPTEMBER 9, 2012 STATEMENT HAVE BEEN SUPPRESSED?
2. DOES THE COERCED UNRELIABLE CONFESSION PROVIDE A MANIFEST INJUSTICE FOR WITHDRAWING ARMIN WAND, III S PLEAS?
3. SHOULD A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY HAVE BEEN ISSUED ON ALL ISSUES?
4. DOES NEWLY DOSCOVERED EVIDENCE PROVIDE A GOOD FAITH SHOWING TO STAY THE PROCEEDINGS TO INVESTIGATE, AND TO RAISE THE NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE IN STATE COURT?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should Armin Wand,III's September 9,2012 statement have been suppressed?
Docket Entries
2022-03-21
Petition DENIED.
2022-02-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/18/2022.
2021-09-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 9, 2022)
Attorneys
Armin Wand, III
Armin Wand III — Petitioner