No. 20-7489

Michael Formica v. Harold W. Clarke, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-03-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review civil-rights criminal-procedure due-process fabricated-evidence fourth-circuit habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel procedural-standards standing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity
Latest Conference: 2021-04-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Fourth Circuit decision was debatable not to review the merits of the claims

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED i, WHETHEL JHE fayeTo beT Déersiod VAS OC6ATA RE To OsauSS THE PETITION £04 HABEAS Conpes AS TIMELY, Zz. WHETHCL THE FoueTé Citlelt Ob tisioa Wts QEBATABRLE RT Te GANT EauiTHee Teetiwe DYE TipespmTAcitAtacd! Anh CMEVAMSTA MES 3, WHETHER THE foverit CiteeT geciyen WAS OEBATALE wore REVIEW THE MERITS 08 THE CLM Thar TRIAL Jvobe Wee ATED THE NET rieweaS DYE PRocéss To A Lait pv BALAMED TAIAE. WHETHER THE PounTH Credit bécrsio! WAS BEBATABLE 1°T To Réview THE MERIT s o€ THE CLRin THAT tHe PéTITUmEnS Cutest ferTaaWéy WAS Meotlt UWWereepargey for Tritt UWbgempth THE AT CaME Cf THE CASE : So WHETHER, TH Cvkrd C1REUT DERISION WAS DEBATAQLE eT To RéYTEW THE peers OF THE CeAim THAT SHE PETITIGMRAS SEepA4 ATTIAMES WAS REFLSIVG To PREPARE Fat TRPAL UNM RMiWED THE Cvitane JE THE CASE. G. WHETHEA THE fovtrh Cee DbtsIe) WAS DEBATABLE prot Te ee VIEW THE PNERTS OF THE CLAIM THAT THE PETITICAERS DECISIQY To REPRESEVT Aitselé wee Yolue rag Aw wirerescéwri? MADE, 7, WHETWER THE FaveTh Citteedl Ogcigiend) WAS DEBATABRLK WOT Te RENEW : THE MERITS of THE Comm THAr Teal pote Plévéntéo FERCTNIE Cross ErawivAaricd of 7H6 OETECTIVE. QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QO. WHeriee tye Court C1eCud DER CSIoN WAS DERATHALE ner To REWEW THO MeLITS of THE CLAIM TAAT JriAd Jvoce PREvEuTEd CFLECTWE Coss ExAnMvATnA OF THE CASE-;nw-CMIEE. G% wHemek tHE Fodert Cree DESSIod WAS O£bATARLE WoT To (eviews THE MEATS THE LhAun PHAT STAM BL Cotwshe RLtEEA To ASSIST Fro PREPARATIO® Fok TRIAL, Aro At yaiae 10, WHETHER ThE FovrTié creevit pgerste) WAS BERATARLE WeT Te PEWEW THE MERTS Of THE CLAIM THAT PETIT ERS ROM RTE Atavey LEruseh Te zweeepo@ATE PeririsvEM'S QUESTIEWS Fat REE VW) WAR mMVED thE OviComME CF THE CASE. Vi VwH ETHER THE Covered cypeuar bétsipe! WAS DEmaTARE eT To CANT Al Ev iniatAtt EAA’ ew THE yagi cok THE CLAIMS Arch EauiT Age ots wb, IZ WHErWER THE Fovern Ciawud Obese WAS OBAATABE HOT to ClAvr gistvery JO PhevyE Jee estates Was FA6RicATES fre SuPPCaT pcAl Tnvecee Cerim: . ISS WAI parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. [ ] All partied do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all

Docket Entries

2021-04-19
Petition DENIED.
2021-03-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.
2021-03-22
Waiver of right of respondent Harold W. Clarke to respond filed.
2021-02-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 19, 2021)

Attorneys

Harold W. Clarke
Toby Jay HeytensOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Toby Jay HeytensOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Michael Formica
Michael Joseph Formica — Petitioner
Michael Joseph Formica — Petitioner