No. 19-6001
Gregory Leroy Packer v. Mark Capozza, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Fayette, et al.
IFP
Tags: appellate-review civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights counsel-duty counsel-representation court-docket court-procedure diligence diligence-appeal due-process legal-diligence pennsylvania-statute prejudicial-delay related-case-law standing statutory-interpretation unprecedent-case
Latest Conference:
2019-11-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. WERE THE APPELLATE COURTS RULINGS UNPRECEDENT FOR THIS CASE?
2. DID THE COURTS DISREGARD PETITIONER'S COURT DOCKET IN THEIR RULING?
3. DID THE COURTS PETITIONER'S UNITED STATES AND PENNSYLVANIA'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
4. DID THE COURTS DISREGARD PENNSLVANIA STATUTE CONCERNING COUNSEL DUTY OF REPRESENTATION?
5. DID THE COURTS DISREGARD RELATED CASE LAW?
6. DID THE COURTS DISREGARD PETITIONER'S DILIGENCE DURING HIS DIRECT APPEAL?
7. WHEN DOES PENNSYLVANIA STATUTUE SAY A PETITIONER MUST SHOW DILIGENCE AFTER A DELAY IS PREJUDICIAL FOR EXCEPTION TO THE RULES?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Were the appellate courts' rulings unprecedented for this case?
Docket Entries
2019-11-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-10-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2019.
2019-09-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 21, 2019)
Attorneys
Gregory Packer
Gregory Leroy Packer — Petitioner