No. 24-6850
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process ineffective-assistance post-conviction-relief sixth-amendment strickland-standard
Latest Conference:
2025-04-25
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the state appellate court misapplied the Strickland prejudice standard when affirming the denial of Petitioner Moran's ineffective assistance of counsel claim
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. : A. QUESTION PR ESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the state appellate court misappl ied this Court’s prejudi ce standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984), when affi rming the deni al of Petitioner Moran’s claim that his trial attorney was ineffecti ve for failing to present excul patory evi dence at tri al. ii B. PAR TIES INVOLVED The parti es involved are i denti fied in the styl e of the case. iii
Docket Entries
2025-04-28
Petition DENIED.
2025-04-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/25/2025.
2025-04-01
Waiver of right of respondent State of Florida to respond filed.
2025-03-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 24, 2025)
Attorneys
Philip Jude Moran
Michael Robert Ufferman — Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Petitioner
Michael Robert Ufferman — Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Petitioner
State of Florida
Trisha Meggs Pate — Office of the Attorney General , Respondent
Trisha Meggs Pate — Office of the Attorney General , Respondent