No. 20-7932
Virgil Delano Presnell v. Benjamin Ford, Warden
IFP
Tags: 2254-limitations 2254(d) appellate-procedure factual-findings federal-habeas federal-review habeas-corpus implicit-findings judicial-interpretation state-court state-court-findings wilson-v-sellers
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Punishment
HabeasCorpus Punishment
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does Wilson v. Sellers permit federal habeas court to assign 'implicit' factual findings to state court order when applying 2254(d)'s limitations on relief
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Does Wilson v. Sellers, 138 S. Ct. 1188 (2018), permit a federal habeas court to assign “implicit” factual findings to a state court’s order when applying 2254(d)’s limitations on relief, or must it rely only upon the specific findings and conclusions offered by the state courts when adjudicating the petitioner’s claims? i
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-18
Reply of petitioner Virgil Delano Presnell filed. (Distributed)
2021-06-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-03
Brief of respondent Benjamin Ford, Warden GDP in opposition filed.
2021-04-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 4, 2021)
Attorneys
Benjamin Ford, Warden GDP
Sabrina D. Graham — Senior Assistant Attorney General, Respondent
Sabrina D. Graham — Senior Assistant Attorney General, Respondent
Virgil Delano Presnell
Monet Brewerton-Palmer — Federal Defender Program, Inc., Petitioner
Monet Brewerton-Palmer — Federal Defender Program, Inc., Petitioner