No. 19-7893
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
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
Nicholas Roos
Nicholas Roos — Petitioner