No. 18-9416

John O. Williams v. Florida

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2019-05-23
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-error constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process fundamental-fairness habeas-corpus jury-instruction jury-instructions lesser-included-offense
Key Terms:
Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the district court judge's order of denial, denying the petitioner's habeas petition and claim, was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : QuetTroms PRESENTED NX Tn Whe detaicT Court dudges order of demwinl, dentin PUTTIN ERG FASle WabeAs PeT TON Awd GoW, Te Honorable Robart L. Winlde Aerenoninved THAT The DeTITemed Wad The evidew TARY Foundation For Vhe lesea included ofFewoe And THAT Tae Petr tione® Was entitled To Relie® on The lesser o&Gmse iki. guid Le The STete CoURTS Rulitug Lads *GonTRARy To. OR INVolWed BH UiRersonalle APricnTion oF lenny esTAblisted Fedeeal Iwo As AcTeamiiled LY The SubReme COURT oF Vee united STwtes, But VeTiTiomeh Lovuld lose Wis lessed itacluded obese Clan bernuse Beak wv RInbaMa, 441 Ud 036 Cage) Was Wot heen exTewded “To Now BARTTA Cises WY Tue SutReme VourT of The United STRtTes Wid Cruce Wis Care is bres Vetere We The Elew oettt Mikauegy Loltebe PeRRY s WHA EAsToh ecTabliclh The Sov eduid \Nlo OF Ke CiRtuit BEE Arreudix (®) IE Te AiGTRT GourT Audde determined ret The PoTicTo mer LOM entitled To Relie® Under The ADERA, Then THAT Mealy demonstrates THT The Triel Cour denied The Poti Towed Wis DUE PRoGESS Ridts To ®.StAudwed JURY UWSTRUETION THAT Lots Cubbent ed \N THe eidewse Addueed at Taint. Cske “Wiel Troncemit ls pages SL 9g) THereFore » Siete The THind Bedd Bod SR TH GH) ViReurts WAS OXVerdbed THerR Rengonin® IN Beak To Mon Carin ages, Audis THAT WT AS ROKSTITUTIONAL eRROR Loot To Sie WB Reauerted ™ laser — \wthuded= offense” Lolteneven The end ence Lo ould SutPoRT W LohwicTon UTHER ONL THe DHARIA oFFenwe OB AL Undtiardsed * Vesse& -inoluded — oftente” OR loTH, Looulduy iY be W dein OF HUE URGES and B® Fundamental misscarridge. OF dustite mst To GRANT The Petctis Wer RelicE on THe lessee OF Fence Claim, “ESKOM ” Sitde THE IWANTR Gt) CARLUIT HRs Aloo Recoahized Tet” THe Refusal bY NW Coury To imoTRuUcd & JURY ow Lesser ‘ity cluded REVS, Lobe Those oFE ens ABe Comsidtency Lotth Acked wnt § THORN of The Case, WEY ComcTitite & ogniamole Baleas oun 4 wdes Cleanly estallictted Eekermel Cools Ud. Ot, Lexis ) lu Salis , HY F.rd BT Sa9y See Wl Agadley vw Dumegam Ale Bad lo U, Lora CATH CiR. Foor, Dob SEE, Duke Te v. PERRIN» Slot FE. Suer, (S30, SILC Dit WY CST Cin 9493 (a) DW) Sin se The Failure GE a STR COURT To INSTRuT The JUN ON Lesser itvcluded obfenses RAGES A QuesTiol THAT is CoIntzable on Wabers PoRWS ReVietos At Whe Some Ci Lum SThiv bes » The Exlute To we The Reauerted UWSTRUCTON Could devarce The defen ANT OF The Euiud anentti RGM To BK ERR TRial RS Seared bY Te UWS. ComeTetution Ue! amend Wid We Trial Courts ReTwus of Remevitud The Renuected lesser ‘cluded oft ome of aT ERY From The STaid endl JURY VWASTRue Thos , WET AeTeRIMWs THAT The wi Wente Added HT TRA Guledrted The Lessee -iteluded oF ene Bhuse ite Alo teetion denmhind ereemed WS Como Twum RGHTS To &® ERA TRinl Under The DUE PROtEss Clause % CSkE TT, te, SE HD). BLE The Eedemol Rules o& CRLWINAL PRoGedure Acal LOTTR lesser included offenses, SEE Rule 3, Bid “The defendants RT Vo Suctt WW WHSTRUeT ION Was eet Retodtrzed Ws Mumeraus AeeiGiohs OF THIG MOURT, SEE €:9, SOuFome We WwiTted Gees FTO US. BME, BHA, FS SET. Uole, ood, WB Liked, Fd BEA CIVETVY WERWANL Lied STetes, BSL Us. ASV VME TG S.0T O95, WO, too LEA, Lo GIs bY GTevensone we ited STates (WX U.S. BWI SET. FAG, Hn LES. AGo LAGAL), AWA SEE AIS Keeble Ve UiiTed STAT D3 S.eT. VS Cissay All boOLbinss bY Wis sur Seles Twat iE Tie TWATRUe TI is Suk eared IY The exrid emer ANA WoUd Wllow OR PemwT A JURY To RoThonll Kid Win QuilTY o€ The Lasse ofFeuse Wud OO ea Win oF The GReaTeR VT is beYoud bio Purte Ther Whe AFemdawT UW EMT Ted To BW WATRUCTION OW THe loa obEeme Thkeefote , nhced ol THe AGING T Gout Judges Ruling Wo Tike VOCTinct -emuie, Aid Vike PUT Totieh meet The evdenTinhy Foumdetoon LutleLe The Vaeld He's CWTHled Vo R&RE ot THe Leek oF emer Oni (cee op, 0) 4) TY Petitwers Vessea-Uncladed offense BA Sudsnet of ACOUCTTAL "AAs Re Held To le Teokiuionl exWiantdh , Then THEY Bere Wor PRodedurmi) DARDEd Bod The Lesser-indthuded oFEtuse FINI Age | dowsideted to GCowmitule w Uoonizeable Keb e

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-05-31
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2019-05-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 24, 2019)

Attorneys

Florida
Trisha Meggs PateOffice of the Attorney General Criminal Appeals Division Tallahassee, Respondent
Trisha Meggs PateOffice of the Attorney General Criminal Appeals Division Tallahassee, Respondent
John O. Williams
John O. Williams — Petitioner
John O. Williams — Petitioner