No. 22-6771

Robert A. Condon v. United States

Lower Court: Armed Forces
Docketed: 2023-02-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review armed-forces court-of-criminal-appeals due-process ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel military-justice remand transcript transcript-discrepancy
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2023-03-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the Armed Forces is susceptible to review by the Supreme Court and requires a remand to obtain findings of fact and law

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Is the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the Armed Forces, which is without findings of fact or law, susceptible to review by this Court which should require a remand to obtain that information to permit meaningful review. 2. Whether the failure of the prosecution to ensure that the same transcript of proceedings was provided to counsel for Petitioner as was. provided to. the prosecution and, if not, whether that warrants relief. 3. Whether Petitioner’s counsel was ineffective in failing to detect that there was a difference in the transcript provided to the prosecution and to him and whether that difference warrants relief. 2

Docket Entries

2023-03-20
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/17/2023.
2023-02-22
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-02-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 16, 2023)

Attorneys

Robert Condon
Richard M. KergerThe Kerger Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
Richard M. KergerThe Kerger Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent