No. 23-7148

Arnold Ancrum v. Ricky D. Dixon, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2024-04-05
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: actual-innocence civil-rights due-process federal-magistrate-act habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus Securities
Latest Conference: 2024-06-06
Question Presented (from Petition)

(1)
WHETHER PETITIONER'S 6th AND 14th AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED UNDER THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATE ACT OF 1979. WHEN A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE WAS NOT FILED DURING PETITIONER'S 2254 PROCEEDINGS

(2)
WHETHER PETITIONER'S 6th AND 14th AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED UNDER STRICKLAND BY TRIAL COUNSEL'S DEFICIENT PERFORMANCE IN FAILING TO SUBPOENA THE TESTIMONY OF THE CASE ATTEMPTED MURDER VICTIM WHO POSSESSED AND FIRED [A]NOTHER .22 WEAPON DURING THE CASE SHOOTING; WHICH TESTIMONY BY STATE WITNESSES SUGGEST WAS THE .22 WEAPON THAT FIRED THE FATAL SHOT

(3)
WHETHER PETITIONER'S 6th AND 14th AMENDMENT WERE VIOLATED BY THE APPELLATE COURT, UNDER THE "INNOCENCE EXCEPTION TO THE PROCEDURAL DEFAULT" PETITIONER MADE A SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING TO PROCEED ON HIS "GATEWAY ACTUAL INNOCENCE" CLAIM SCHLUP WHERE AN "EYEWITNESS" AND "CRITICAL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WAS NOT PRESENTED AT TRIAL"

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether petitioner's 6th and 14th amendment rights were violated

Docket Entries

2024-06-10
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/6/2024.
2023-12-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2024)

Attorneys

Arnold Ancrum
Arnold Ancrum — Petitioner