No. 21-7798
Francisco Manuel Padilla v. California
IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights counsel-appointment criminal-procedure due-process ineffective-assistance judicial-discretion plea-bargaining plea-withdrawal right-to-counsel standard-of-review
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. DID THE COURT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION, AND THEREBY VIOLATE APPELLANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, WHEN IT DENIED HIS MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEAS?
2. DID THE TRIAL COURT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION, AND THEREBY VIOLATE APPELLANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, WHEN IT DENIED HIS MARSDEN MOTION FOR NEW APPOINTED COUNSEL?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the trial court abuse its discretion and violate the appellant's constitutional rights by denying his motion to withdraw his pleas?
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-04-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 6, 2022)
Attorneys
Francisco M. Padilla
Francisco M. Padilla — Petitioner