No. 18-9758

Lavell Conerly v. Willis Chapman, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-06-21
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process due-process,self-incrimination,miranda-warnings,cl inculpatory-statement ineffective-assistance-of-counsel miranda-warnings right-to-counsel self-incrimination
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment CriminalProcedure Securities
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was it reversible error to introduce defendant's inculpatory statement obtained without Miranda warnings?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. WAS IT REVERSIBLE ERROR VIOLATING THE PETITIONER'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE DUE PROCESS OF LAW DURING CLOSING ARGUMENTS TO INTRODUCE HIS INCULPATORY STATEMENT MADE TO POLICE, WHERE DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT WAS OBTAINED WITHQUT THE BENEFIT OF MIRANDA WARNINGS AND IN VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION? II. WAS THE DEFENDANT DENTED HIS STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TG HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, WHERE TRIAL COUNSEL FAILED TO OBJECT DURING THE PROSECUTOR'S TO INTRODUCTION OF TRE DEFENDANT'S INCULPATORY STATEMENT MADE TO POLICE AS THE STATEMENT WAS QBTAINED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF MIRANDA WARNINGS AND IN VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION? di

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2018-11-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 22, 2019)

Attorneys

Lavell Conerly
Lavell Conerly — Petitioner
Lavell Conerly — Petitioner