No. 19-8757
George W. Gibbs v. Robert LeGrand, Warden, et al.
Tags: charge-severance child-sex-assault clearly-erroneous counsel-error criminal-procedure drug-counts ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel ninth-circuit-review prejudice prejudicial-joinder severance
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit's rejection of Gibbs's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was clearly erroneous
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether the Ninth Circuit’s rejection of Gibbs’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim was clearly erroneous when the court mistakenly concluded Gibbs was not prejudiced as a result of his attorney’s failure to move to sever highly inflammatory child sex assault counts from drug counts? i
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-14
Waiver of right of respondent Robert LeGrand, Warden, et al. to respond filed.
2020-06-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 20, 2020)
Attorneys
George W. Gibbs
Robert LeGrand, Warden, et al.
Erica Berrett — Nevada Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Erica Berrett — Nevada Attorney General's Office, Respondent