No. 23-5497
Malik Woods v. District Attorney of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2253 certificate-of-appealability civil-procedure constitutional-rights due-process habeas-corpus procedural-review standing supreme-court-precedent third-circuit-court
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-10-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Third Circuit Court of Appeals run contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Question(s) Presented 1. Did the Third Circuit Court of Appeals run contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent in Miller-El v Cockerell, 537 US 322, (US 2003), contrary to Slack v. McDaniel, 5229 US 473, (US 2000), and contrary to USCS 28 § 2253 when the Third Circuit denied Petitioner’s COA on the merits before considering a threshold inquiry of whether Petitioner made a substantial showing that his constitutional right had been violated. iti arg ane) .
Docket Entries
2023-10-10
Petition DENIED.
2023-09-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2023.
2023-09-07
Waiver of right of respondent District Attorney Philadelphia, et al. to respond filed.
2023-08-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 2, 2023)
Attorneys
District Attorney Philadelphia, et al.
Nancy Winkelman — District Attorney's Office, Respondent
Nancy Winkelman — District Attorney's Office, Respondent