Legal Opinion

Zapata v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided August 9, 2006No. 01-2575PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY ORDER

Familiarity by the parties is assumed as to the facts, the procedural context, and the specification of appellate issues. In seeking a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Zapata raises an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Initially, the district court held that, even assuming that Zapata’s counsel, Lisa Seolari, did not consult with Zapata regarding an appeal, “petitioner is unable to demonstrate that his attorney had a duty to consult with him regarding his right to appeal, or that he would have appealed but for counsel’s failure to perform that duty.” Galviz Zapata v.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Roe v. Flores-OrtegaSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  5. United States v. Ramse ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re Brian PelletierVermont Superior Court · 2012
  2. United States of America v. Abiola OlajumokeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API