No. 22-6636
Mostafa Kamel Mostafa v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure defense-counsel federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel newly-discovered-evidence post-trial-motion rule-33
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-02-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel may be raised under Rule 33(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel may be raised under Rule 33(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure? 2. Whether the production of evidence to defense counsel as compared to access to that evidence by the defendant should be distinguished in the context of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel? i DIRECTLY
Docket Entries
2023-02-21
Petition DENIED.
2023-02-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2023-01-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 27, 2023)
2022-12-20
Application (22A406) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until January 24, 2022.
2022-12-15
Application (22A406) to extend further the time from January 9, 2022 to January 23, 2022, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
2022-11-09
Application (22A406) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until January 9, 2023.
2022-11-05
Application (22A406) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 24, 2022 to January 8, 2023, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
Attorneys
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent