No. 18-6396
Guillermo Solorio, Jr. v. William Muniz, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2244(b)(2) brady-v-maryland brady-violation criminal-defendant criminal-procedure evidence-suppression federal-statute habeas-corpus hidden-evidence second-or-successive-petition
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2018-11-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus based on Brady v. Maryland Evidence That Was Hidden from a Criminal Defendant — Until After Appeal and Denial of an Earlier Federal Habeas Corpus Petition — Is Subject to the Requirements for a Second or Successive Petition Within the Meaning of 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(2)
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus based on Brady v. Maryland Evidence That Was Hidden from a Criminal Defendant — Until After Appeal and Denial of an Earlier Federal Habeas Corpus Petition — Is Subject to the Requirements for a Second or Successive Petition Within the Meaning of 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(2) 1
Docket Entries
2018-12-03
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/30/2018.
2018-10-25
Waiver of right of respondent William Muniz, Warden to respond filed.
2018-10-23
Waiver of right of respondent William Muniz, Warden to respond filed.
2018-10-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 21, 2018)
Attorneys
Guillermo Solorio, Jr.
Amitai Schwartz — Law offices of Amitai Schwartz, Petitioner
Amitai Schwartz — Law offices of Amitai Schwartz, Petitioner