No. 21-306

Troy Seales v. California

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2021-08-31
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: counsel-rights criminal-procedure due-process ex-parte-hearing ineffective-assistance right-to-be-present right-to-counsel trial-fairness
Key Terms:
DueProcess Privacy
Latest Conference: 2021-10-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Supreme Court err in failing to rule that the exclusion of Petitioner and his counsel from an ex parte hearing violated Petitioner's rights to be personally present, to counsel at all stages of the Proceedings and to due process of law?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Supreme Court err in failing to rule that the exclusion of Petitioner and his counsel from an ex parte hearing violated Petitioner’s rights to be personally present, to counsel at all stages of the Proceedings and to due process of law? 2. Did the Supreme Court err in failing to rule that the order preventing defense counsel from revealing to Petitioner the existence of a statement obtained from Kendrick Riley pursuant to P.C. 1054.7 violated Petitioner’s rights to a fair trial, to present a defense and to due process of law? 3. Should the Supreme Court have determined that trial counsel was ineffective by failing to object to inadmissible evidence about uncharged crimes, in violation of Petitioner’s’ rights to a jury trial, to counsel, and to due process of law? 2

Docket Entries

2021-11-01
Petition DENIED.
2021-10-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/29/2021.
2021-08-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 30, 2021)

Attorneys

Troy Seales
Aaron SpolinSpolin Law P.C., Petitioner