No. 23-5259
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review conflict-of-interest due-process equal-protection federal-rules-of-evidence fourteenth-amendment ineffective-assistance-of-counsel state-court-decisions
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Wyoming Supreme Court apply and follow Federal Rules of Evidence correctly?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED I. DID THE WYOMING SUPREME COURT APPLY AND FOLLOW FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE CORRECTLY? il. IS THE WYOMING SUPREME COURTS DECISION ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, OR OTHERWISE NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW? TI. WAS MR. HILYARD DENIED HIS FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL ON APPEAL... NO STATE SHALL MAKE OR ENFORCE ANY LAW WHICH SHALL... DENY TO ANY PERSON WITHIN IS JURISDICTION THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS? IV. WAS APPELLANT COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE IN NOT RAISING THE QUESTION OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL, AND PRESENTING THE WEAKEST ISSUE OF EVIDENCE CHALLENGES BECAUSE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST? i
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-08-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-08-16
Waiver of right of respondent Wyoming to respond filed.
2023-03-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 31, 2023)
Attorneys
Wyoming
Kristen Reeves Jones — Office of the Wyoming Attorney General, Respondent
Kristen Reeves Jones — Office of the Wyoming Attorney General, Respondent