No. 21-6353

Stephen Allwine v. Minnesota

Lower Court: Minnesota
Docketed: 2021-11-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: access-to-courts court-funding due-process equal-protection financial-status in-forma-pauperis judicial-discretion legal-procedure post-conviction post-conviction-relief
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Trial Court err in denying In Forma Pauperis funding based on financial status at start of prosecution rather than post-conviction action?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1) Did the Trial Court err in denying In Forma Pauperis funding , for post-conviction services based upon Petitioner's | financial status at the beginning of the prosecution (Jan, 2-: | 2017) rather than the beginning of the post-conviction | action (2020)> | |

Docket Entries

2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-08
Waiver of right of respondent Minnesota to respond filed.
2021-11-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2021)

Attorneys

Minnesota
Nicholas Andrew HydukovichWashington County Attorney's Office, Respondent
Nicholas Andrew HydukovichWashington County Attorney's Office, Respondent
Stephen Allwine
Stephen Allwine — Petitioner
Stephen Allwine — Petitioner