No. 20-6605
Demondray D. Mayo v. Perry Russell, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: circuit-split federal-court federal-review habeas-corpus habeas-petition reasonable state-court state-court-reasoning statutory-interpretation wilson-v-sellers
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a federal court incorrectly applies 28-U.S.C-2254(d)
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a federal court reviewing a habeas petition incorrectly applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and Wilson v. Sellers, 138 S. Ct. 1188 (2018), when it relies on reasoning given by a state court on a different claim than the one under review in order to rule that the state court’s opinion was reasonable under § 2254(d). i
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2020-12-18
Waiver of right of respondent Perry Russell, et al. to respond filed.
2020-12-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 11, 2021)
Attorneys
Demondray D. Mayo
Emma Smith — Federal Public Defender, District of Nevada, Petitioner
Emma Smith — Federal Public Defender, District of Nevada, Petitioner
Perry Russell, et al.
Jessica Perlick — Office of the Nevada Attorney General, Respondent
Jessica Perlick — Office of the Nevada Attorney General, Respondent