No. 18-5959
John Ingebretsen v. Jack Palmer, Warden, et al.
Tags: cause-and-prejudice certificate-of-appealability civil-rights due-process habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel martinez-v-ryan plea-bargaining post-conviction-counsel procedural-default
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2018-10-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in denying a request for a certificate of appealability
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in denying a request for a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether Ingebretsen could show cause and prejudice under Martinez v. Ryan to overcome the procedural default on the claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the facts or review the State’s evidence prior to advising Ingebretsen to plead guilty? 1
Docket Entries
2018-10-29
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.
2018-10-02
Waiver of right of respondents Palmer, et al., to respond filed.
2018-09-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 15, 2018)
Attorneys
John Ingebretsen
Palmer, et al.,