No. 21-6285

Gary Hughbanks v. Tim Shoop, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-11-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: admissibility-of-evidence appellate-review brady-materiality brady-v-maryland confession-evidence criminal-procedure due-process materiality-analysis sixth-circuit suppressed-evidence
Latest Conference: 2022-02-18
Question Presented (from Petition)

Are another individual's repeated statements confessing to the murders for which the defendant is on trial material for purpose of assessing the impact of the suppressed evidence?

Does an appellate court err when it conducts a materiality analysis pursuant to Brady v, Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and does not consider some of the suppressed evidence and improperly discounts other portions of the suppressed evidence?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Are another individual's repeated statements confessing to the murders for which the defendant is on trial material for purpose of assessing the impact of the suppressed evidence? Does an appellate court err when it conducts a materiality analysis pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and does not consider some of the suppressed evidence and improperly discounts other portions of the suppressed evidence?

Docket Entries

2022-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.
2022-01-19
Reply of petitioner Gary Hughbanks submitted.
Main DocumentOther
2022-01-11
Brief of respondent Tim Shoop, Warden in opposition filed.
Main DocumentProof of Service
2021-11-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 15, 2022.
2021-11-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 17, 2021 to February 15, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
Main Document
2021-11-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 17, 2021)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionAppendixOther

Attorneys

Gary Hughbanks
David Paul Williamson — Bieser, Greer & Landis, Petitioner
Tim Shoop, Warden
Benjamin Michael Flowers — Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, Respondent