No. 19-6061
IFP
Tags: capital-case capital-punishment due-process eighth-amendment ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mitigation-investigation sixth-amendment strickland-v-washington
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment
DueProcess Punishment
Latest Conference:
2019-11-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether trial counsel is ineffective in a capital case when counsel conducts their mitigation investigation after the trial begins, does not allow their experts enough time to fully investigate their client's background, and fails to discover their client's childhood sexual abuse
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether, pursuant to Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) and its progeny, trial counsel is ineffective in a capital case when counsel conducts their mitigation investigation after the trial begins, does not allow their experts enough time to fully investigate their client’s background, and, as a result, fails to discover their client’s childhood sexual abuse. U.S. Const. amend. VI, VIII, XIV. i
Docket Entries
2019-11-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2019.
2019-10-23
Brief of respondent State of Ohio in opposition filed.
2019-09-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 25, 2019)
Attorneys
Phillip Jones
Kimberly Sue Rigby — Office of the Ohio Public Defender, Petitioner
Kimberly Sue Rigby — Office of the Ohio Public Defender, Petitioner
State of Ohio
Jacquenette Susanne Corgan — Summit County Prosecutor's Office, Respondent
Jacquenette Susanne Corgan — Summit County Prosecutor's Office, Respondent