No. 25-5770
Charles Anthony Holmes v. Oklahoma
IFP
Tags: appellate-review constitutional-challenge criminal-procedure second-amendment statutory-interpretation strickland-standard
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2025-12-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether 21 O.S. § 645, 644B are unconstitutional as applied to Petitioner because they violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals failed to reasonably apply Strickland v. Washington
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
1. Whether 21 O.S. § 645, 644B are unconstitutional, as applied to Petitioner, because they violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution? 2. Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals failed to reasonably apply this Court ’s holding in Strickland v. Washington where Petitioner ’s Appellate Counsel failed to raise or adequately raise the constitutionality of 21 O.S. § 645, 644, as applied to Petitioner?
Docket Entries
2025-12-08
Petition DENIED.
2025-11-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
2025-09-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 31, 2025)
Attorneys
Charles A. Holmes
Charles A. Holmes — Petitioner