No. 19-8451

Michael Skinner v. Raymond Madden, Warden

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-05-13
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review due-process factual-determination habeas-corpus judicial-review procedural-default state-court-decision state-court-review trial-record
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2020-06-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a State Court Decision an Unreasonable Determination of the facts When it Determines That a Claim Was not Sufficiently Developed in the Record for Appellate Review When the Trial Record Shows that the Claim was in fact Properly Developed and Not Procedurally Defaulted

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Is-a State Court Decision an Unreasonable Determination of the facts When it Determines That a Claim Was not Sufficiently Developed in the Record for Appellate Review When the Trial Record Shows that the Claim was in fact Properly Developed. ' and Not Procedurally Defaulted. . 1

Docket Entries

2020-06-08
Petition DENIED.
2020-05-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.
2020-05-18
Waiver of right of respondent Raymond Madden, Warden to respond filed.
2020-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 12, 2020)

Attorneys

Michael Skinner
Michael D. Skinner — Petitioner
Michael D. Skinner — Petitioner
Raymond Madden, Warden
Ernesto Carlos DominguezCalifornia Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Ernesto Carlos DominguezCalifornia Attorney General's Office, Respondent