No. 22-7620
Timothy Sean Coogle v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights criminal-procedure due-process entrapment evidence-sufficiency fabricated-evidence ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel insufficient-evidence sixth-amendment strickland-standard
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-06-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Question not identified
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
ESTIONS PRESENIED ~thy was a Sixth Amentrent viblation not acivessed iin the lower courts vhere defendant's Lawyer failled under the Strickland standards? ; How ils the defendant charped witth an attempt crire when no substantial step was taken? : “thy iis thsuffibiient and fabricated evidence not fully addkessad tin the lower courts? “ity ves entrament Sopered ih the arguments ven caselaw ard the goverment's actions clearly show defendant was entrapped? : , : | TALL OF CONIENIS Page ‘TABLE OF CNIS. Fil TABLE OF ii PEITTION FOR A WRIT OF CERITOURL 1 DECISION Hil L 1
Docket Entries
2023-06-26
Petition DENIED.
2023-06-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/22/2023.
2023-05-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-04-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 22, 2023)
Attorneys
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent