Whether the Court of Appeals failed to apply the applicable standards

estion Presented oO Lo . Whether the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia failed to apply the applicable ; standards in Strickland V. Washington, 4ee US. 668 (1984), and Hill V. bockhart, 474 Us, 5a (qes) to determine 'f @ pha is knowingly, voluntarily, and inte Myents 4 made, where a detence. attorney lied Lo his cheat, misleads ne Ais ¢hent to acupta plea he never Should have accepted? Also, whether the Court of Appeals failed to . apply the applicable stindards in Murray Vo. Carrier, 417 US. 418; and te Clesky V. Cant, 499 U.S. 444 in determining whether a D.C. Code * . | 23-10 motion is appropriate tor defendants that a can aemorstrate that they wtre prevented by 7 eeceptional circumstances trom raising their tsSues . lat the proper time? . : 11 . . Oo List of Farties The Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Criminal Division Felony Branch Relattd Cases United States VJason C. Whren, Case No. 2012CFI32-0908, Superior Court of the Listrict of Columbia. Judgment entered 7 : Febuary aS, 2019. App. F | dason’ @. WhAren Vo United States, Case No. 14-co-3a6, Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. Judgement entered January 27, 2020, and of her 1S, DODO. App. The Court of Appeals entered the JSperrent . lyn petitioners. dase on Seruary o-6, 20a/. This petition 1S Filed wittin 2.70 days atter . . entry ot the [edpment. See Sup. Ch R145. An extention to tile the petition wes piven on. dates Sune 3, 2-031, August U4, 201, and September 30, 2021. — . | This Court’ has Jesaction To prent certiorari under 28 U-S.C. SIA57@.