≡ Menu

22. Habeas corpus

State ex rel. Luis Santana v. Endicott, 2006 WI App 13 Issue/Holding1: A claim that lapsed direct appeal rights should be restored on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel must be sought via habeas filed in the court of appeals, pursuant to State v. Knight, 168 Wis. 2d 509, 484 N.W.2d 540 (1992): ¶1       … Read more

{ 0 comments }

State ex rel. Luis Santana v. Endicott, 2006 WI App 13 Pro se Issue/Holding1: A claim that lapsed direct appeal rights should be restored on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel must be sought via habeas filed in the court of appeals, pursuant to State v. Knight, 168 Wis. 2d 509, 484 N.W.2d 540 (1992): ¶1       … Read more

{ 0 comments }

Dennis Thompson, Jr. v. Battaglia, 458 F. 3d 614 (7th Cir. No. 04-3110, 8/14/06) Issue/Holding: Because (c)ounsel’s work must be assessed as a whole,” an ineffective-assistance claim is a single ground for relief for certificate of appealability purposes, though R. 2(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, does require that the petitioner specify all grounds for relief… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State ex rel Marvin Coleman v. McCaughtry, 2006 WI 49, reversing and remanding summary order of court of appeals, reconsideration denied, 2006 WI 121 For Coleman: Brian Kinstler Issue/Holding: ¶28      Prihoda, Sawyer, Lohr and Schafer all employ a three-element test where the first element is unreasonable delay in bringing the claim and the other two elements apply to the party asserting laches: lack of knowledge… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Larry W. Myartt v. Frank, 7th Cir No 04-2115, 1/21/05Issue/Holding: … AEDPA standards apply only to claims that were “adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). In the instant case, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not address Myartt’s ineffective assistance claim, which is unsurprising because Myartt’s pro se filing… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State ex rel. Frederick Lee Pharm v. Bartow, 2005 WI App 215 For Pharm: Roisin H. Bell (Pro Bono) Issue/Holding( Dicta): ¶12, n. 6: The State also draws a distinction between statutory habeas corpus and common law habeas corpus, contending that the circuit court properly ruled that Pharm was not entitled to statutory habeas corpus relief because… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Michael A. Sveum v. Smith, 403 F. 3d 447 (7th Cir. No. 05-1255, 3/31/05) Issue/Holding: Denial of FRCP 60(b) motion to reopen, which was in effect a “mislabeled habeas corpus petition reasserting” previously rejected claim, required certificate of appealability. Jones v. Braxton, 392 F.3d 683, 688 (4th Cir. 2004) (district court’s dismissal of motion, on ground it… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Iran D. Evans, 2004 WI 84, reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals For Evans: Robert R. Henak Issue/Holding: The petition for writ of habeas corpus procedure mandated by State v. Knight, 168 Wis. 2d 509, 522, 484 N.W.2d 540 (1992) is the exclusive mechanism for seeking reinstatement of direct appeal deadlines lost on account of… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS