No. 22-5030

Paul John Denham v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al.

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2022-07-05
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights criminal-procedure defendant-protections due-process exculpatory-evidence habeas-corpus judicial-bias post-conviction-relief prosecutorial-misconduct
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)

Where a Criminal defendant has a postconviction habeas petition alleging the district attorney's office engaged in Brady/Napve multiple intentional violations during defendant's prosecution would it be difficult for a habeas judge to appear impartial when judge, a former prosecutor, worked for Same district attorney's office and employed same culpable law enforcement witnesses to prosecute her prior cases?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a criminal defendant's post-conviction habeas petition alleging the district attorney's office engaged in multiple intentional frauds to appear impartial when the judge was a former prosecutor in prior cases raises a valid claim for relief

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 4, 2022)

Attorneys

Paul Denham
Paul Denham — Petitioner