No. 18-5639

Daniel Castleman, aka Chingachgook v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2018-08-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: best-evidence-rule brady-violation confrontation-clause documentary-evidence due-process evidence evidence-certification federal-rules-of-evidence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel prosecutorial-misconduct
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2018-10-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the government commit prosecutorial misconduct and was counsel ineffective for failing to object or move to exclude GX-DC-2

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. DID THE GOVERNMENT COMMIT PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND WAS COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO OBJECT OR MOVE TO EXCLUDE GX-DC-2, WHEN THE GOVERNMENT PRESENTED CRITICAL EVIDENCE, TO-WIT GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT GX-DC-2, AS BUSINESS RECORDS UNDER THE FED. R. EVID. 803(6) EXCEPTION, CERTIFIED UNDER FED. R. EVID. 902(11), WHEN THE CERTIFICATION CERTIFIED TWO PAGES AND THE EXHIBIT CONTAINED THREE PAGES, THUS MATERIALLY ALTERING THE NATURE OF THE EXHIBIT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE GOVERNMENT WITHHELD TWO OF THE THREE PAGES FROM DISCOVERY AND SUBSTITUTING ONE NONMATERAIL PAGE THEREBY INTIMATING CONSISTENCY WITH 902(11) CERTIFICATION IN VIOLATION OF FED. R. EVID. 803(6)(e) AND 902(11) AND BRADY, AND THE , CONFRONTATION CLAUSE? —— it. DID THE DISTRICT COURT ERR IN DECIDING THAT TRIAL COUSNEL WAS NOT INEFFECTIVE FOR HIS FAILING TO OBJECT TO THE ADMISSION OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WHICH HAD BEEN EDITED BY FBI PERSONNEL AND OTHERS “VIOLATING CASTLEMAN'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS, RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION, FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 1002, 1003, 1004 ("BEST EVIDENCE RULES"); AND DID THE APPELLATE COURT ERR IN FINDING IT WAS NOT DEBATABLE AMONGST REASONABLE JURISTS? i ° ‘ CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS ; . : The following persons are believed, by Daniel Castleman, Petitioner, to have an interest in the outcome of the proceeding: . : Canova, Christopher P., United: States Attorney; . Castleman, Daniel, pro se, Petitioner; . Davies, Robert G., United States Attorney; Freitas, Lisa M., Assistant United States Attorney; Goldberg, Davie L., Assistant United States Attorney; Kent, William M., Sentencing and Appellate Counsel; Murphy, George F., Trial Defense Counsel; : Pocock, Vicki, FBI Investigative Analyst; Power, Brenden, Constable, Queensland Police Service, Australia; : Wilder, Charles, FBI Special Agent. ; ii

Docket Entries

2018-10-09
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-09-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-04-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 17, 2018)
2018-02-09
Application (17A848) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until April 12, 2018.
2018-01-26
Application (17A848) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 11, 2018 to April 12, 2018, submitted to Justice Thomas.

Attorneys

Daniel Castleman
Daniel Castleman — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent