No. 23-7799

Esther Martin v. Indiana

Lower Court: Indiana
Docketed: 2024-06-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: competency competency-to-stand-trial counsel-performance due-process effective-assistance-of-counsel ineffective-assistance intellectual-disability post-conviction post-conviction-proceedings sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether counsel performed deficiently by failing to investigate and challenge an intellectually disabled defendant's competency based on known red flags rather than only information supporting competency

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the trial of incompetent persons, and the Sixth Amendment entitles criminal defendants to the effective assistance of counsel. The question presented is whether a claim that counsel performed deficiently for Sixth Amendment purposes by failing to investigate and challenge an intellectually disabled defendant’s competency is determined by looking at the red flags known to counsel rather than only at information that could support a competency finding. 1

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-17
Waiver of right of respondent State of Indiana to respond filed.
2024-06-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 25, 2024)

Attorneys

Esther Martin
John Arthur PinnowPublic Defender of Indiana, Petitioner
State of Indiana
James Allen BartaOffice of the Indiana Attorney General, Respondent