No. 20-7783
Michael A. Farrell v. Chris S. Buesgen, Warden
IFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process habeas-corpus lower-court-ruling perjured-testimony standing supreme-court-precedent
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Securities
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Securities
Latest Conference:
2021-06-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Are the lower court's rulings in direct conflict with Supreme Court precedent?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW —. , : 1. Are the lower court's rulings in direct conflict with Supreme Court precedent ? , , ' 2. Did petitioner make a substantial showing he's in custody in violation of his Constitutional , . ° Tights ? . | 3. Was the denial of petitioners argument for "perjured Machner testimony" wrongfully denied and the use of this testimony in direct conflict with Supreme Court precedent ? | | ‘ |
Docket Entries
2021-06-21
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/17/2021.
2021-04-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 17, 2021)
Attorneys
Michael A. Farrell
Michael A. Farrell — Petitioner