No. 25-6120

In Re Steven Michael Backstrom

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2025-11-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: cruel-unusual-punishment due-process fourteenth-amendment habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance trial-counsel
Latest Conference: 2025-12-05
Question Presented (from Petition)

1- a) Does a failure by trial counsel to investigate known-to-be
material facts and/or witnesses, constitute federally defined
ineffective assistance of counsel? If so, b) would the submission
of a sworn affidavit in defense of ineffective assistance of coun
sel allegations in habeas corpus, rife with material misrepresen
tations of material fact constitue an admission by conduct? If so,
has any federal right been violated?

2- Was Relator deprived of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due
process where his trial was a platform for material perjury?

3- Does a cumulated sentence contrary to state law constitute
cruel and unusual punishment as defined within the Eighth Amend
ment of the U.S. Constitution?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does a failure by trial counsel to investigate known-to-be material facts constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, and would material misrepresentations in a habeas corpus affidavit violate federal rights?

Docket Entries

2025-12-08
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2025-11-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
2025-11-02
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.

Attorneys

Steven Backstrom
Steven Michael Backstrom — Petitioner