No. 19-7055

In Re Charlene Rosa

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2019-12-23
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: brady-v-maryland civil-rights constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process equal-protection evidence fourth-amendment habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel search-and-seizure strickland-v-washington
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2020-01-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the state court violated the defendant's constitutional rights by denying his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, denial of due process, and denial of equal protection

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : a e @ Sealy % trict Laboratory adiisa to th dae sey and teal Ow Cuideme thot Phere wos on Wpprophioxe wh L, “Yared ov. soda duty thn thabuas ctl as preasetsh bah aun Oct 4 Whakhur dhe eri Crody Violakon ay na) ont wot'ce Pursuank Co Aude 3-ARo Ub) (4) feed by the Habe poco ake. ONY Tashung ound or ae df 3: Lobukhur Eviduny 4 Maly Diacouwneal ond CucoeAce based eM |. NAavine from the Amani com Gocaly of Crnt Ladyorasary) and, dolce prisuant To Aube % 22 0) filed hs He Fe Confichuds. Viable Evidence, motessary to Reuse pwd Evidonca, lau wren Grady V Maryland 46%. his Whehor Vol Oucotensd idence Coo 19'o SOKAY CFIOW Show 3 felony vioapdour idence protontel Co Phe Susy loy “tha. dofamsa, Counsel agaunst hia cluink Camnstchia a yrisocupel On the Fut dugnen Wider Plomida costco weenie Seclion 444, OVW Ura S4-Blo Laws —% Honida bh 2 Siguyicand wos MNKa, olden othe fluo Kegalh wa a Wamifodt 5. Whdhor decane Coumsal Usunuahin tothe Sony, ine) Phos kon nee Ar YOM Cpa “Lo A thud fenmat herent Noma wurolh Yo aok hor Monoy frown ha Vicki and thot __ @ @ | Busfhien(s) frosrdad Conlinued Ouida Kibd the Vidum U Gnrury! Po Phe. Sypalghse lin, Uhane Tha dag cated ute lid a dinnelion adingent at oad feind Nee O.ce%¥or ong woke. intel cy Halal Un the Kus degree and; 6, | Wwhathur Wowly O4 Coused Cudence, cated dacachad MN fleod na and Show? dowhe prececud ion bp om Catsrsntod a Public Dupont amd the Jake aden un a, (V0! 05-O144ICFLOA a dow opandy, ond otedon the Surg la homicide mula whosein dsyamna Counsel pra Cupar Qelom wurden theory did not Cond duke a Moor updudad ofan 4 Fut} dag rox Murdoefo which The dx(andach Woo une . 4-flokckhur Wnordad sudormadion (resondsd fo 4he Sar by the slobe vad wie. saa Sion, Aalite pao 2 Stiparsods, Pha tudickwont G8o wo! 64-010894¢KI0A | to Which the do¢sundounh was Sanka ce on the Gaplo’ Qamadikoded turner Dladabon and thayonepndifmanl to which the dsfamdad Woo Somboneg 50 dogacine Prod @ \udgnanh on Convicon Comnot ; 8 lUohethor Coda Mo! 0s olleni4-cKIoM thot Fhows Evidence [prasenkad to tha ry loy diane courte) oblsgabion thad Kin clamk oligo wndittdrod) aowne oulclt to 2tlorh gaynors {re¥n the Yicluin and tho Oubch allegedly xibled 10 vicki Wns Woe prasoqui lay Yhe Slabs ob Mla dome hod doyonsa Coumpal Wed YK Glidunce te obtain CNViGhen oki sh agai counsel on om Aduoysanad) Poss Counsel thot Viclake, dYandanSiath nondmanch @ Qusflian (3) Presambed Conf iniad q|Whebhur Whe record wndicaty had difumeo Counsel Conduched 2 anabea dart sche unhu ding (8a M0! 65014414 crloM (gle preterut bo the Blake ator o Blake, dun didligand) to ob Wain aConvioion, 10. flukdhor the Convichon was based on digands Cumpele aileoahion tothe J 29, Un) tho “The dsgendoars Cosine the wen Pease? by Sanies a hur acho hak shows Caso Woo 5~ of4Gl le cFIO4 wndar fl inp Za lol Whicker the gloke Cee, (rBonked Co Pha Sut y Gidea! 05-0/4/cFI0 4. Ria. Aad + 92-04 Q) Chasza and on Accuse tha dyfurdand oglauso® . the dott of the Vide autd om tn Su cid evidence, to ofatitd Bas Syontaat Conga’ thy 4 tho Wicluin and on joe) WhadhuWhe myer | dacisvom “toad Pek WCOse WO! OS~ 6/4414 CFIOA/Prsenked ay a brea, dyand.a . Cre arate! nid cbtagn tansy esa Wiad loli Mt Wao InsuZies 7) th tothe digandanh Gaucad the Math op the towhdhor Maly durcourned cuidemce 9 Memorandum , jor dua dunaetedyordank sitath tsk the dante, | Goungal docisian of La.thine to challiase tha abled typed Kalohons. Comuspalions) Was foto Andigic decision bukthig he hie Clawmurg thot hi RCo niz-213 the Voice. to ae hot % hi olionk.’ andy , MO ee ee Te Stilts te lade dee ‘ Ak €Q nae @ @ GusflionlS) Posonted te the ant which Wolate hur suf mun Nfld defen » " uth Anand 12.|Whider the CumuloduLe vin pack sma Coumsedls LUunconfl duhonabity Cow at valbad ene a tual Sala y ondy yy (Wwhodhor t whi dante Coupe)? aie) dict frgormance sd ine on ihe, Sir srmnasion Whi olodcom dyandesd andl dlonabdild ond Sal} m a tundamuntel wn-four tal and; 1210] Whither donde Counte

Docket Entries

2020-01-21
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2020.
2019-12-10
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.

Attorneys

Charlene Rosa
Charlene Rosa — Petitioner
Charlene Rosa — Petitioner