Whether a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel is violated when trial counsel fails to access or review critical transcripts before sentencing without the defendant's consent

No question identified. : TRULINCS 18079002 JOYNER, LEROY THOMAS JR Unit: YAZ-B-A FROM: 18079002 TO: Legal SUBJECT: ***Request to Staff*** JOYNER, LEROY, Reg# 18079002, YAZ-B-A DATE: 09/23/2025 09:58:55 AM To: Inmate Work Assignment: SUPREME COURT Comes Now, Petitioner Leroy Thomas Joyner, Jr. (hereinafter "Joyner") pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23.1 as well as in relations to a petition filed from the summary affirmance of appellate case no. 25-10616 (hereinafter "Appeal #2") and request a stay of the lower court proceedings under appellate case no. 24-12605 (hereinafter "Appeal #1") currently pending in the Eleventh Circuit. In support, he offers the following: Procedural and Legal Background 1. Having been compelled to comply with the final order holding within Parr v. United States for nearly (42) months, after his conviction Joyner sought to challenge all pre-trial, trial and sentencing issues he had previously raised under case nos: (hereinafter "Indictment #1-2"), (hereinafter "Indictment #3") and 1:22-cr-00242 -ECM-JTA (hereinafter "Indictment #4"). 351 U.S. 513, 518-19 (1956) (explaining that, if a dismissed indictment and a subsequent re-indictment are viewed together as parts of a single prosecution, the order dismissing the initial indictment is neither final nor immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine); See United States v. Kelley, 849 F.2d 1395, 1397 (11th Cir. 1988) (explaining that "the rule that emerges from the Supreme Court decision in Parr v. United States is that a criminal defendant may not immediately appeal a district court order . and that "any challenge . must await the defendant's subsequent conviction”); See p. 50a-51a. 2. Fully understanding the effect of the implemented law of the case doctrine, the Petitioner contacted his trial attorney seeking transcripts needed for sentencing and on appeal. See White v. Murtha, 377 F.2d 428, 431-32 (5th Cir. 1967) (law of the case doctrine dictates that "a decision of a legal issue or issues by an appellate court establishes the "law of the case" and must be followed in all subsequent proceedings in the same case in the trial court or on a later appeal in the appellate court); See p. 254a, para. 1. 3. With the intent to object to the Pre-sentence Investigation Report (hereinafter "PSR") and its associated enhancements, Joyner exhausted nearly (5) months requesting access to the desired transcripts. See p. 85a, para. 2. Unbeknowing to him, his trial attorney had objected to the PSR not only without conferring with him, but without extracting exculpatory facts from the requested transcripts. See p. 254a-263a. That violation of his sixth amendment rights coupled with trial counsel's failure to access the requested transcripts prompted the Petitioner to raise those issues with the district court. See p. 77a-87a. TRULINCS 18079002 JOYNER, LEROY THOMAS JR Unit: YAZ-B-A FROM: 18079002 TO: Legal SUBJECT: ***Request to Staff*** JOYNER, LEROY, Reg# 18079002, YAZ-B-A DATE: 09/23/2025 06:39:54 PM To: Inmate Work Assignment: SUPREME COURT 4. A hearing was held where his right to object to the PSR was restored (See p. 326a), but his need to do so with the requested transcripts was not addressed. (See p. 10a, para. 3). As a result, that issue was separately raised with that court where the trial judge delegated Joyner's evidentiary and fact-finding concerns to the magistrate judge without his consent. (See p. 313a). The issued order (See p. 88a-99a) was not only a plain error, but left him without the requisite transcripts to object to the PSR and carry his burden at sentencing in sufficing any challenge to the Government meeting their preponderance of the evidence burden. (See United States v. Ruiz-Rodriguez 277 F.3d 1281 (11th Cir. 2002)) (concluding that Sections 636 and 34014 do not contain any specific grant of authority for a magistrate judge, either independently or on a district court's referral for a report and recommendation, to conduct the e