No. 18-8621

Roummel Ingram v. John Prelesnik, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-03-29
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process evidentiary-hearing habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel public-trial sixth-amendment sixth-circuit
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2021-06-24 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Mr. Ingram is entitled to a new trial due to ineffective-assistance-of-counsel

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Mr. Ingram is entitled to a new trial, or alternatively a full evidentiary hearing, because his trial and appellate counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the legality of his arrest. 2. Whether Mr. Ingram is entitled to a new trial because the trial judge sealed the courtroom during the testimony of a key prosecution witness.

Docket Entries

2021-06-28
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2019-06-21
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-05-01
Waiver of right of respondent John Prelesnik, Warden to respond filed.
2018-09-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 29, 2019)

Attorneys

John Prelesnik, Warden
Fadwa A. HammoudMichigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent
Roummel Ingram
Roummel Ingram — Petitioner