No. 20-1059

Roy H. Murry v. Washington

Lower Court: Washington
Docketed: 2021-02-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: anders-brief court-of-appeals due-process fourteenth-amendment pro-se pro-se-briefing right-to-counsel sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-02-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was Mr. Murry denied his Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED weg oe The questions presented are: . Was Mr. Murry denied his Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process? [when his pro se briefing brought to the Court of Appeals' attention "legal points" arguable on their merits and the Court ordered that these should be briefed by the State only; while simultaneously refusing to allow Petitioner's counsel to also file supplemental briefing on the pro se issues. | When determining how a court of appeals is required to handle “legal points" which come to its attention by means other than an appellant's counsel; does it matter whether appointed counsel filed an Anders brief or a merits brief, prior to pro se issues arguable on their merits being raised by an appellant? EWS ius) | Loe

Docket Entries

2021-03-01
Petition DENIED.
2021-02-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.
2021-02-04
Waiver of right of respondent State of Washington to respond filed.
2021-01-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 5, 2021)

Attorneys

Roy H. Murry
Roy H. Murry — Petitioner
Roy H. Murry — Petitioner
State of Washington
Lawrence Dean SteinmetzSpokane County Prosecutor's Office, Respondent
Lawrence Dean SteinmetzSpokane County Prosecutor's Office, Respondent