No. 22-5330

Demetrius J. Wade v. Harold W. Clarke, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-08-10
Status: Rehearing
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: 14th-amendment 5th-amendment criminal-procedure due-process evidence-tampering fifth-amendment forensic-evidence fourteenth-amendment habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-01-19 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendment rights violated when police tampered with evidence and removed bullet fragments recovered from the victim at his autopsy, and failed to submit them to the forensic scientist for comparison against bullets test fired from the alleged murder weapon?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Claim # 1 on instant Writ of Certiorari. Was issue # 1 on application for Certificate of Appealability; Was claim # 1 on §:2254 . Writ of:Habeas Corpus. (1).Was petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendment Rights violated when police tampered with evidence and removed bullet fragments recovered from the victim at his autopsy,and failed to submit them to the forensic scientist for comparison against. bullets:test fired from the alleged murder weapon? “Claim # 2 on instant Writ of Certiorari. Was issue # 2 on application for Certificate of Appealabilityy Was claim # 2-b on § 2254 Writ of Habeas Corpus. (2).Was petitioner prejudiced after his trial counsel was ruled to be deficient in this claim for failing to investigate the missing bulletcfragments that were removed from the victim and submitted to police; but police " tampered with evidence, and did not submit all the fragments to the forensic scientist for testing? ; Claim # 3 on the instant Writ of Certiorard. Was issue # 3 on application for Certificate of Appealability. Was claim # 2-d on § 2254 Writ of Habeas Corpus. (3).Was petitioner prejudiced after his trial counsel was ruled to be déficient in this claim for providing him with incorrect information when he first negotiated and presented him with a potential plea that had limited time to accept restrictions? Claim # 4 on the instant Writ of Certiorarii Was issue # 4~on application for Certificate of Appealability. Was claim # 2-e on § 2254 Writ of Habeas Corpus. (4).Was petitioner prejudiced after his trial counsel was ruled to be deficient in this claim for advising petitioner,while coercing him’ to take a plea, that upon a conviction of 4 murders, that he.would be punished for 4 murders,although there was only 2 victims? -H

Docket Entries

2024-01-22
Motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing filed by petitioner DENIED.
2024-01-03
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2024.
2023-05-09
Motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing filed by petitioner.
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-08-16
Waiver of right of respondent Harold Clarke to respond filed.
2022-07-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 9, 2022)

Attorneys

Demetrius Wade
Demetrius Jermaine Wade — Petitioner
Demetrius Jermaine Wade — Petitioner
Harold Clarke
Andrew Nathan FergusonOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Andrew Nathan FergusonOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent