No. 19-8908

Preston Pope v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-07-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-justice-act criminal-justice-act-1964 davis-decision direct-appeal first-step-act griffith-v-kentucky ineffective-assistance notice-to-client rule-28(j)-letter writ-of-certiorari
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 require notice to client for writ of certiorari?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Does the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, 15 Still require that Appellant Counsel provide notice to his client by way of a written letter to his client to request if he wants to file a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court? Does Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 321 n.6 (1987) still exist as controlling law when "new" Supreme Court decision in Davis was announced and appellant counsel refuse to raise claim by way of a Rule 28(j) letter , to preserve issue on Direct Appeal? ’ Does Griffith v. Kentucky still exist as controlling law when the ; First Step Act [Section 4031 and appellant counsel refuse to address the stacking of guns under [18 U.S.C. § 924(c)] while he was still on "direct appeal"? ; Can Appellant Court find that appellant counsel provided "ineffective assistance on direct appeal" under a motion to "Recall Mandate"? . i

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-06-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 6, 2020)

Attorneys

Preston Pope
Preston Pope — Petitioner
Preston Pope — Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent