Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Steven Lee Moss v. Gary Miniard, Warden

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 21-1655 · judgment March 17, 2023


Certiorari denied · February 20, 2024
Pre-decision estimate: 5% cert probability

Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and a Sixth Circuit decision below, and down for a state or local-government respondent.

Question presented

The Sixth Amendment provides a criminal defendant with “the right to the effective assistance of counsel,” Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 118 (2017) (citations omitted), not just the presence of a lawyer in the courtroom. Typically, claims of ineffective assistance are governed by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Strickland requires a reviewing court to find both deficient performance by counsel and prejudice—that is, a reasonable probability that the result would have been different but for counsel’s errors—before it can find that the defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel. Id. at 694. Under United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658-60 (1984), however, prejudice to the defendant is presumed in rare circumstances. One of those circumstances is when the defendant suffers a complete denial of counsel—actual or constructive—at a critical phase of the proceedings. Id. at 659; Strickland, 466 U.S. at 692. Following its own precedent, the Sixth Circuit held below that when counsel is “physically present,” a defendant cannot suffer a complete denial of counsel under Cronic unless counsel’s ineffectiveness was caused by a state actor. The question presented is whether, when counsel is physically present, state action is required before a court may find a complete denial of counsel under Cronic.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Brian Wolfman
Georgetown Law Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic

For respondent
Ann Maurine Sherman
Michigan Department of Attorney General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Linked docket
23A6

Proceedings

  1. Feb 20 2024
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Jan 31 2024
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
  3. Jan 30 2024
    Reply of petitioner Steven Moss filed. (Distributed)
  4. Jan 16 2024
    Brief of respondent Gary Miniard, Warden in opposition filed.
  5. Nov 17 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 16, 2024. See Rule 30.1.
  6. Nov 16 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2023 to January 15, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
  7. Nov 14 2023
    Response Requested. (Due December 14, 2023)
  8. Nov 08 2023
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2023.
  9. Nov 02 2023
    Waiver of right of respondent Gary Miniard, Warden to respond filed.
  10. Oct 25 2023
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 27, 2023)
  11. Jul 07 2023
    Application (23A6) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until October 27, 2023.
  12. Jun 30 2023
    Application (23A6) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 30, 2023 to October 27, 2023, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.