Shimel v. Warren
Petition for certiorari denied on April 24, 2017
Issue: Whether it is a reasonable application of clearly established federal law to require a habeas petitioner, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with a guilty plea, to demonstrate under the “prejudice” prong of Strickland v. Washington that but for counsel's ostensible deficient performance: (1) the petitioner, or a rational person in the petitioner's position, would have pled not guilty and received a favorable outcome at trial, as required by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th and 9th Circuits; rather than (2) the petitioner, or a rational person in the petitioner's position, would simply have pled not guilty, as required by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for 3rd, 4th, 7th, and 10th Circuits.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) |
|---|
| Dec 5 2016 | Application (16A571) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 21, 2016 to February 19, 2017, submitted to Justice Kagan. |
| Dec 9 2016 | Application (16A571) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until February 19, 2017. |
| Feb 20 2017 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 24, 2017) |
| Mar 23 2017 | Waiver of right of respondent Millicent Warren, Warden to respond filed. |
| Apr 5 2017 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 21, 2017. |
| Apr 24 2017 | Petition DENIED. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. |
