No. 20-8196

William Severs v. Andrew J. Bruck, Acting Attorney General of New Jersey, et al.

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2021-06-02
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: appeals appellate-procedure constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel legal-error right-to-counsel supreme-court-precedent third-circuit-court
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Decisions of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the District Court for the District of New Jersey were contrary to the United States Supreme Court decisions in Garza v. Idaho, Roe v. Flore-Ortega, and McCoy v. Louisiana

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Mr. William Severs make leave to appeal the following issues: 1) Whether the Decisions of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the District Court for the District of New Jersey were contrary to the United States Supreme Court decisions in Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S. , 139 S.Ct. 738 (2019); Roe v. Flore-Ortega, 584 U.S. 470 (2000) and McCoy v. Louisiana, 584 U.S. , 138 S.Ct. 1500 (2018) 2) Whether Petitioner was subjected to Ineffective ~ Assistance of Third Circuit Appointed Counsel when Counsel failed to Raise and argue the Garza Issue on _ Appeal to the Third Circuit when Petitioner's Appeal was pending at the time when Garza was decided? (see District Court Opinion at Appx C at *6); (see also

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-05-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 2, 2021)

Attorneys

William Severs
William Severs — Petitioner
William Severs — Petitioner