No. 18-6626

William Foley Miller v. Florida

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2018-11-08
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-rights due-process federal-habeas federal-procedure habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mistrial procedural-default right-to-counsel state-appellate-review
Latest Conference: 2019-01-11
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Who did not use any federal case's or federal codes, did not preserve these issues for review that creates an unexhausted and procedurally defaulted claim in a federal habeas corpus §2254, does the state appellate attorney have to have a specific allotment to make a separate federal argument in the appellate brief?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED L, Noes A State Appellate Who Did Not Use Any Federal Case's Or Faderal Codes Di Not Preserve Thase -Lesves For ReveiW Thzt Creats A Un) exhausted And Prace durally Defaulted Claim Ln A Fadefa | Habeas Corpus $2284 Does The State Appellate Attorney, Have lo Had A SPeciFiae Aloe d To Make A Seperate Fader! ArauomMent In The Appellate Brie F 2 ll, Does The State Trial ComMent . Fund«wMental Error When It Denies AK DeFendatis Motion For Mistrial When A State Witness TL MProPerlY CoM Ments On The Deka ndant Request For Public DeFender 2

Docket Entries

2019-01-14
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.
2018-08-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 10, 2018)

Attorneys

William F. Miller
William Folley Miller — Petitioner