No. 24-7215

In Re Jamie Varieur

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2025-05-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review ineffective-assistance-of-counsel procedural-due-process strickland-standard summary-order writ-of-mandamus
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Takings JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-06-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether, as a matter of procedural due process, a writ of mandamus directing the Second Circuit to consider and issue a decision on the points presented in the petitioner's appellate briefs is warranted

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Petitioner Jamie Varieur appealed her probation revocation sentence on the grounds that her prior attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984), by failing to present argument s or objections relating to two discrete issues. The government then filed a response brief in which it did not acknowledg e the petitioner’s presented Strickland claims. Instead, the government purported to respond to two frivolous Sixth Amendment arguments the petitioner did not present. The petitioner subsequently filed a reply brief in which she explain ed that the government had overlooked and misrepresented her arguments . Pursuant to the petitioner’s request for an expedited appeal, t he case was submitted without oral argument . The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ultimately entered a “summary order” that does not acknowledge the petitioner’s Strickland claims but instead resolve s the non-presented arguments described in the government’s response . The petitioner filed a timely petition for rehearing in which she explained that the summary order overlooks her presented arguments and contains no indication that her briefs were reviewed in connection with the determination of her appeal. The Second Circuit denied the petition through a brief order that likewise does not acknowledge the petitioner’s arguments . The question presented is whether , as a matter of procedural due process, a writ of mandamus directing the Second Circui t to consider and issue a decision on the points presented in the petitioner’s appellate briefs is warranted . ii STATEMENT OF RELEATED PROCEEDINGS United States v. Varieur , No. 24-985-cr (L), 24 -2967 -cr (Con) , U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Summary Order and Judgment issued February 28, 2025; petition for rehearing denied April 25, 202 5. United States v. Varieur , No. 1:22 Cr. 56 (AMN ), U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. Judgment entered November 30, 2022; Judgment for Revocation of Probation entered April 5, 2024 .

Docket Entries

2025-06-30
Petition DENIED.
2025-06-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/26/2025.
2025-05-23
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-05-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-05-13
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 16, 2025)

Attorneys

Jamie Varieur
Lucas Arment AndersonRothman. Schneider, Soloway & Stern, LLP, Petitioner
Lucas Arment AndersonRothman. Schneider, Soloway & Stern, LLP, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent