Legal Opinion

United States v. Spight

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided March 6, 2017No. Criminal No. 13-254 (DWF/TNL); Civil No. 16-2459 (DWF)Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DONOVAN W. FRANK, United States District Judge

INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner-Defendant Jamillo Donte Spight’s (“Petitioner-Defendant”) motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. No. 119) in which he alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective because: (1) he did not present DNA evidence in the case connecting him to the firearm in question; and (2) he did not pursue gunshot-residue testing. The Petitioner-Defendant also alleges that his appellate counsel was ineffective because appellate counsel: (1) failed to pursue a Johnson…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  3. John R. Tiedeman v. Dennis Benson, Warden, State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
  4. Lozada v. DeedsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Robert Flieger v. Paul K. Delo, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API