No. 18-6344
Brandon Eugene Lacy v. Arkansas
IFP
Tags: criminal-procedure cumulative-error cumulative-error-analysis fundamental-fairness habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mental-health neuropsychological-evaluation neuropsychological-testing Sixth-Amendment strickland-standard Strickland-v-Washington
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Arkansas Supreme Court misapplied Strickland v. Washington
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Arkansas Supreme Court misapplied this Court’s ruling in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 688 (1984) by finding it reasonable for trial counsel to forego consultation with a neuropsychological specialist despite numerous red flags pointing to Lacy’s brain damage and the express recommendation of another mental-health expert to do so. 2. And, whether trial counsel’s deficiencies should be considered individually or cumulatively in assessing Sixth Amendment dating under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). ii
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-15
Brief of respondent State of Arkansas in opposition filed.
2018-10-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)
2018-08-16
Application (18A173) granted by Justice Gorsuch extending the time to file until October 14, 2018.
2018-08-14
Application (18A173) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 15, 2018 to October 14, 2018, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.
Attorneys
Brandon Lacy
William O. "Bill" James Jr. — The James Law Firm, Petitioner
William O. "Bill" James Jr. — The James Law Firm, Petitioner
State of Arkansas
Pamela Rumpz — Assistant Attorney General, Respondent
Pamela Rumpz — Assistant Attorney General, Respondent