No. 21-7561
Ana Duarte-Pineda v. United States
Tags: appellate-counsel appellate-review conflict-of-interest criminal-procedure due-process indigent-defendant ineffective-assistance pro-se-response sixth-amendment sua-sponte-replacement
Latest Conference:
2022-04-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
If an indigent criminal defendant's pro se response to a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel and that trial counsel is affiliated with the appellate counsel who filed the Anders brief, creating a probable conflict of interest, does the appellate court have a duty to sua sponte replace the defendant's appellate counsel with unconflicted counsel?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether an appellate court has a duty to replace a defendant's appellate counsel with unconflicted counsel when the defendant's pro se response to an Anders brief alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel and a probable conflict of interest with the appellate counsel
Docket Entries
2022-05-02
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/29/2022.
2022-04-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-04-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2022)
Attorneys
Ana Duarte-Pineda
Eric Joseph Brignac — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent