No. 21-1318

Gregory Bogomol v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-04-04
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived Experienced Counsel
Tags: 28-usc-2255 evidentiary-hearing federal-procedure fourth-amendment habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel knock-and-talk motion-to-suppress warrantless-search
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus CriminalProcedure Privacy
Latest Conference: 2022-04-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

What is the proper standard for determining when a federal habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing under 28 U.S.C. § 2255?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The questions presented are: 1. What is the proper standard for determining when a federal habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing under 28 U.S.C. § 2255? 2. Does an individual receive ineffective assistance of counsel when his defense attorney fails to file a motion to suppress evidence seized from a warrantless search of the individual’s residence, where law enforcement agents conducted a “knock and talk” at the residence with the intent to search for incriminating evidence and gained entry to search the residence by falsely telling the individual that they were investigating whether he and his wife were the victims of identity theft?

Docket Entries

2022-05-02
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/29/2022.
2022-04-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-03-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 4, 2022)

Attorneys

Gregory Bogomol
Andrew Brooks GreenleeAndrew B. Greenlee, P.A., Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent