Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Tiffany Brown v. United States

IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 25-11785 · judgment September 3, 2025


Certiorari denied · March 23, 2026

Questions presented

  1. Whether Petitioner was denied effective assistance of appellate counsel when court-appointed counsel failed to file or consult Petitioner about filing, a petition for panel rehearing under Federal rule of Appellate Procedure 40 or a petition for rehearing en banc under Rule 35, resulting in the complete forfeiture of appellate review on Counts 1-29.

  2. Whether procedural forfeiture (default) caused solely by counsel’s neglect or abandoned as opposed to any informed or strategic decision by the defendant must be excused under this Court’s decision in Maple v Thomas , 565 U.S. 266 (2012), Holland v Florida, 560 U.S. 631 (2010), and Garza v Idaho, 139 S. Ct. 738 (2019).

  3. Whether an indigent defendant may be denied the right to proceed pro se on direct appeal, and whether the denial of that right followed by counsel’s subsequent forfeiture of all appellate remedies constitutes structural error the Sixth Amendment.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Tiffany Brown

For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Mar 23 2026
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Mar 05 2026
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2026.
  3. Mar 02 2026
    Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
  4. Dec 02 2025
    Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 26, 2026)