No. 24-5990

Darius Rush v. James Corrigan, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-11-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: brady-violation constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process evidence-suppression trial-counsel
Latest Conference: 2025-01-17
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether defense attorneys' failure to challenge Constitutional violations during trial counsel's opening statement and cross-examination resulted in ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment, and whether such violations should be reviewed under the harmless error standard.

Whether trial counsel's failure to object to prosecutorial misconduct and improper jury instructions constituted ineffective assistance of counsel requiring reversal.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a criminal defendant's constitutional rights were violated when trial counsel failed to challenge potentially coerced evidence and suppressed testimony under Brady v. Louisiana

Docket Entries

2025-01-21
Petition DENIED.
2025-01-07
Waiver of James Corrigan, Warden of right to respond submitted.
2025-01-07
Waiver of right of respondent James Corrigan, Warden to respond filed.
2025-01-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2025.
2024-11-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 19, 2024)

Attorneys

Darius Rush
Darius Rush — Petitioner
James Corrigan, Warden
Ann Maurine ShermanMichigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent