No. 22-4

Donald G. Karr, Jr. v. Mark R. Sevier, Warden

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2022-06-30
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-rights counsel-rights davis-hatton-procedure due-process fourteenth-amendment ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel procedural-default sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Davis-Hatton Procedure is unconstitutional as-applied

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the Davis-Hatton Procedure is unconstitutional as-applied to Mr. Karr’s case and whether the Indiana State Courts and United States District Court For The Southern District of Indiana erred in denying Mr. Karr Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment’s guaranteed right to counsel and due process. Whether the appellate attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by initiating a Davis Petition. Whether the United States District Court For The Southern District of Indiana erred in not holding ineffective assistance of counsel when Petitioner’s counsel objectively failed, with that failure’s impact a disproportionately positive multiplier effect forgone, when the standard of review is not about whether there would be a different verdict with the evidence, but whether in its absence he received a fair trial. Whether the United States District Court For The Southern District of Indiana erred in not holding ineffective of counsel from an accumulation or errors.

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-08-01
Waiver of right of respondent Mark Sevier to respond filed.
2022-06-27

Attorneys

Donald G. Karr
Robert L. Sirianni Jr.Brownstone, P.A., Petitioner
Robert L. Sirianni Jr.Brownstone, P.A., Petitioner
Mark Sevier
Aaron Thomas CraftOffice of the Indiana Attorney General, Respondent
Aaron Thomas CraftOffice of the Indiana Attorney General, Respondent