No. 18-8160

Paul Wagner v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-02-27
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: attorney-conflict circuit-court-split circuit-split criminal-procedure cuyler-v-sullivan ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel legal-precedent mickens-v-taylor ninth-circuit sixth-amendment supreme-court-interpretation united-states-v-hanoum
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-03-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Ninth Circuit's decision conflicts with other circuit courts and Supreme Court precedent on the issue of actual conflict between a defendant and his trial attorney

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED This case presents an issue on which the Ninth Circuit’s has both (1) entered a decision in conflict with the decisions of two other United States Courts of Appeals on the same important matter, and (2) has decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court. Specifically, the Ninth Circuit’s decision regarding the actual conflict between Mr. Wagner and his trial attorney is based on the Ninth Circuit’s 1994 case of United States v. Hanoum, 33 F.3d 1128 (9 Cir. 1994), which itself conflicts with the D.C. Circuit’s case of United States v. Torres, 115 F.3d 1033 (D.C. Cir. 1997) and the Tenth Circuit’s case of United States v. Johnson, 12 F.3d 1540 (10 Cir. 1993). It also conflicts with the United States Supreme Court cases of Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980) and Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162 (2002). ii

Docket Entries

2019-04-01
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/29/2019.
2019-03-06
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-02-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 29, 2019)

Attorneys

Paul Wagner
Mark D. EibertLaw Office of Mark Eibert, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent