No. 19-6808

Phillip E. Smith v. Collins, First Name Unknown, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-12-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2253 certificate-of-appealability cumulative-error due-process fourteenth-amendment insufficient-evidence miller-el-v-cockrell ninth-circuit severance sixth-amendment slack-v-mcdaniel trial-severance video-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference: 2020-01-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Ninth Circuit err in denying a certificate of appealability?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Did the Ninth Circuit err in denying a certificate of appealability to a petitioner who raised four substantial claims that his conviction was unconstitutional due to insufficient evidence, the introduction into evidence of a video of his arrest, the failure to sever his trial from that of his co-defendant, and cumulative error, contrary to the due process clauses of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and in conflict with the standards for a certificate of appealability set by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) and by this Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003) and Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000)? ii

Docket Entries

2020-01-21
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2020.
2019-12-18
Waiver of right of respondent First Name Unknown Collins, et al. to respond filed.
2019-11-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 2, 2020)

Attorneys

First Name Unknown Collins, et al.
Heather Diane Procter — Respondent
Heather Diane Procter — Respondent
Phillip Smith
Mark D. EibertLaw Office of Mark Eibert, Petitioner
Mark D. EibertLaw Office of Mark Eibert, Petitioner