No. 23-5522
Javier Guerra v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: certificate-of-appealability criminal-procedure drug-quantities fifth-circuit ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel sentence-enhancement sentencing-enhancement strickland-standard strickland-v-washington
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-10-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was the defense counsel ineffective according to the Strickland v. Washington 466 U.S. 668 (1984) precedent when failing to alert Guerra about potential sentence enhancement due to dismissed drug quantities?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ! Given the case's specifics, was the defense counsel ineffective | according to the Strickland v. Washington 466 U.S. 668 (1984) precedent | when failing to alert Guerra about potential sentence enhancement due | to dismissed drug quantities? If so, did the Fifth Circuit err by not | | | | | | | in)
Docket Entries
2023-10-10
Petition DENIED.
2023-09-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2023.
2023-09-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-08-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 6, 2023)
Attorneys
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent