No. 21-6197
Lance Arnold Kingbird v. Vicki Janssen, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2253 certificate-of-appealability circuit-split federal-court-procedure federal-courts habeas-corpus judicial-review reasonable-jurists similar-facts statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a federal court may find that 'reasonable jurists would not disagree' about the denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 where other courts have resolved similar issues favorably to the habeas petitioner
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. In deciding whether to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, may a federal court find that “reasonable jurists would not disagree” about the denial of relief where other courts have resolved these issues, on similar facts, in a manner favorable to habeas petitioner’s position? 2
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-11-29
Waiver of right of respondent Vicki Jasnssen, Warden to respond filed.
2021-11-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 6, 2021)
Attorneys
Lance Kingbird
Zachary Allen Longsdorf — Longsdorf Law Firm PLC, Petitioner
Zachary Allen Longsdorf — Longsdorf Law Firm PLC, Petitioner
Vicki Jasnssen, Warden
David P. Frank — Beltrami County Attorney's Office, Respondent
David P. Frank — Beltrami County Attorney's Office, Respondent