No. 22-7310

Antonio Minnis v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-04-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure enhanced-sentence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel plea-bargaining prejudice-prong sentencing-enhancement sixth-amendment strickland-standard strickland-v-washington
Latest Conference: 2023-05-18
Question Presented (from Petition)

This Court in Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 80 L.Ed.2d 674, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (1984), laid the foundation for the gauging of ineffective assistance of counsel claims. When an attorney admits to this ineffectiveness and the Defendant rejects a favorable plea, does the subsequent enhanced sentence justify the court 's prejudice prong presented in Strickland.

Should a writ of certiorari be granted based on this court 's reasoning in Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 80 l.ed.2d 674, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (1984) when counsel failed to properly research a Career Offender application [and admitted to his misadvise] which led Minnis to reject a favorable initial plea offer

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the court's prejudice prong in Strickland v. Washington is satisfied when an attorney admits to ineffective assistance and the defendant rejects a favorable plea, resulting in an enhanced sentence

Docket Entries

2023-05-22
Petition DENIED.
2023-05-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/18/2023.
2023-05-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-04-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 18, 2023)

Attorneys

Antonio Minnis
Antonio Minnis — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent