No. 19-7893

Nicholas Roos v. Arkansas

Lower Court: Arkansas
Docketed: 2020-03-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: capital-case evidence-suppression ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel motion-to-suppress plea-bargaining psychological-evaluation red-flags strickland-standard strickland-v-washington trial-counsel-performance
Key Terms:
CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2020-04-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did Arkansas Supreme Court misapply Strickland-v-Washington

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Did Arkansas Supreme Court misapply this Court’s ruling of Strickland v. Washington, by finding it effective for the trial counsel of a capital case to press forward a plea deal without any consultation with a psychological and/or neuropsychological specialist despite numerous red flags and requests made by Roos and Roos’ family. 2) And, whether the two prongs of Strickland were fulfilled when trial counsel of a capital case chose to forgo a proper investigation of time sensitive evidence wherein a motion to . suppress evidence failed to be filed. il “ a ;

Docket Entries

2020-04-27
Petition DENIED.
2020-04-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/24/2020.
2020-04-03
Waiver of right of respondent Arkansas to respond filed.
2020-02-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 6, 2020)

Attorneys

Arkansas
Michael Anthony CantrellOffice of the Arkansas Attorney General, Respondent
Nicholas Roos
Nicholas Roos — Petitioner