No. 23-502
Noble U. Ezukanma v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: counsel-advice criminal-procedure defendant-testimony due-process ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel prejudice right-to-testify sixth-amendment strickland strickland-standard
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2023-12-08
Question Presented (from Petition)
How do the standards for judging ineffective assistance of counsel apply to the question of what advice defense counsel gives to a defendant concerning whether he should testify at trial?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
How do the standards for judging ineffective-assistance-of-counsel apply to the question of what advice defense-counsel gives to a defendant concerning whether he should testify-at-trial?
Docket Entries
2023-12-11
Petition DENIED.
2023-11-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2023.
2023-11-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-11-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 14, 2023)
Attorneys
Noble U. Ezukanma
Gary Alan Udashen — Udashen Anton, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent