No. 18-7628

Anthony Brian Bevan v. Florida

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2019-01-29
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights due-process fourteenth-amendment governmental-misconduct ineffective-counsel spoilage-of-evidence stare-decisis usc-242
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment Immigration Patent
Latest Conference: 2019-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was the Petitioner denied Due Process, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, and/or in violation of U.S.C Code # 242, and/or in violation of his civil rights and/or was the Stare Decisis Doctrine wrongfully ignored, as evidenced by the Governmental Misconduct in the Spoilage of Evidence?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Was the Petitioner denied Due Process, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, and/or in violation of U.S.C Code # 242. and/or in violation of his civil rights and/or was the Stare Decisis Doctrine wrongfully ignored, as evidenced by the Governmental Misconduct in the Spoilage of Evidence? 2. Was the Petitioner denied Due Process, in violation of the (14th) Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and/or in violation of his civil rights, and/or was the Stare Decisis Doctrine wrongfully ignored, as evidenced by a violation of 18 U.S.C. Code # 242 with a written bribe to a Government Official, to bring about a false arrest? 3. Was the Petitioner denied Due Process when Governmental Misconduct Occurred that denied his 6% Amendment guarantee of counsel and the 14% Amendment Clause of Due Process, and/or in violation of 18 U.S.C. code # 242, and/or in violation of his civil rights, and/or was the Stare Decisis Doctrine wrongfully ignored, especially in respect to his lack of representation by counsel at a Deposition of the arresting officer? , 4. Was the Petitioner denied Due Process, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Clause of Due Process, and/or in violation of 18 US.C. code # 242, and/or in violation of his civil rights, especially in respect to the fact that he was wrongfully incarcerated for (8) three years after his New Law Case was Nolle Prossed and dismissed? 5. Was the Petitioner represented by Ineffective Counsel whose ineffectiveness and misrepresentation that the Petitioner was not ; subject to deportation, resulted in the Petitioner’s agreement to Plead Guilty, which Pleas have now subjected him to deportation in Immigrations Removal Hearings? -\

Docket Entries

2019-07-15
Rehearing DENIED.
2019-06-20
DISTRIBUTED.
2019-04-12
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2019-02-15
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2018-11-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 28, 2019)

Attorneys

Anthony Brian Bevan
Anthony Brian Bevan — Petitioner
Anthony Brian Bevan — Petitioner
Florida
Carla Suzanne BechardOffice of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent
Carla Suzanne BechardOffice of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent