No. 20-6628

Rodane Lamb v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2020-12-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: conspiracy-charges criminal-procedure dea-testimony due-process evidence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel jury-instructions jury-selection trial-errors
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment
Latest Conference: 2021-01-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was counsel ineffective for not challenging issues

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : 1) Was Counsel Ineffective For Not Challenging Petitioner's Stated Cumulative Errors in Argument One? : : *" 2) Was Counsel Ineffective For Not Challenging DEA Special Agent Doug Griffith's Testimony? : : 3) Petitioner Should Have Been Charged With A Buyer Seller Relationship, Rather Than With A Conspiracy With Co-defendant? 4) Was Counsel Ineffective For Not Objecting To A Package That Was Intercepted By The U.S. Postal Service? . ’ 5) Should Counsel Have Objected To The Testimony Of Jeff : ; Bairstow? . : : . 6) Was Counsel Ineffective For Not Objecting To The Jury , Instructions That Were Erroneous? , : 7) Was Counsel Ineffective For Not Challenging The All While Jury Panel? . : \ :

Docket Entries

2021-01-25
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.
2020-12-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-11-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 14, 2021)

Attorneys

Rodane Lamb
Rodane Lamb — Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent