# Prologue — Allen v. United States

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386016_0126%3A0

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Prologue
- **Published:** January 1, 2005
- **Citation:** 546 U.S. 877

## Text

Y

wo. 95 243 aug 19 2005

be

IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

TERRY ALLEN,

Petitioner,
vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit

—>
\
4

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Michael B. Cohen
Attorney At Law

35 BE. Wacker Drive
Suite 595

Chicago, IL., 60601
(312) 726-0739

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court
of Appeals and the district court have
unconstitutionally denied Petitioner his
constitutional rights to due process of
law and equal protection of the law by
failing to grant appellate review and
collateral review of Petitioner's claim
that his conviction had been obtained in
violation of his Sixth Amendment right
to have ceunsel of his choice to present
his defense?

2. Whether the district court's rul-
ing and the appeal court's ruling the
Petitioner had failed to make a substan-
tial showing of the denial of a constitu-
tional right are inconsistant with the
standards to be applied in reviewing an
application for a certificate of appeal-
ability pronounced by this Court in Slack
v. McDaniel, 523 U.S. 423, 146 L.Ed.2d
542, (2002), and Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003)?

ii

INTERESTED PARTIES

There are no other parties than
those named in the caption on the cover
page of this petition who have any type
of interest in the outcome of this case.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Questions Presented... .seseceeceseseceed
Interested PartieS.......-ceeeeeeeseecii
Table Of ContentsS.....ceecceeseceveeciili
Judgment Below....cccccccccccccsccoseeVs
Table of Authorities..........e+022.2eVii
aE. Se SEONG waincvecucVewcecere nell
Judgment and Opinion Below.............1
Jurisdictional Statement.......2eee002-2

Constitutional and Statutory
Provisions Involved... cece ccecesceeeed

Statement of the Case. ......cccceeeeese4
Reasons For Granting Certiorari.......11

1. The Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and the district court have
denied Allen his constitutional rights
to due process and equal protection of
the law by failing to grant appellate
and collateral review of Allen's clain
that his conviction was obtained in
violation of his Sixth Amendment right
to choice of counsel to present his

ae nn a a ee

IV

Page

2. The district's court's ruling
and appeal court's ruling that Allen
had failed to make a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitu-
tional right are inconsistant with
the standards to be applied in re-
viewing applications for certificates
of appealability pronounced by this
Court in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.
523, (2002) and Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, (2003)....... eccccecceos -23
CONCLUSION. coccccccesccscocces wrrrrrey ..
Appendices:

A. Unpublished Opinion of the
United States Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit rendered and
entered on November 26, 2002..... Appx. 1

B. Order of dismissal entered
by the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
on October 20, 2004.....++.4+..2+-Appx. 15

C. Order of the United States
District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of Florida denying COA dated
January 12, 2005S. cccccccccccccccAPMPX. 29

Page

D. Order entered by Circuit
Court Judge Joel F. Dubina of the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit denying
a Cértificate of Appealabilty on
March 11, 2005....cccseecceesee Appx. 26

E. Order entered by Circuit
Court Judges Dubina and Tjoflat
of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
denying a Certificate of Appeal-
ability on April 21, 2005....... Appx. 27

vi

The judgment entered by the United
States Court of Appeal for the Eleventh
Circuit at Docket Number 05-10222-G, is
attached as Appendix E to this petition.

vii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases cit... Page
Bonner v. City of Prichard, Alabama

661 F.2d 1206 411th Cir. 1981).......-17

Brown v. United States,
156 L.Ed.2d 847 (2003) (table)....16, 17

Dorman v. Wainwright,
798 F.2d 1358 (11th Cir. 1986)....20, 21

Ex Parte Royall, 117 U.S. 286,

22 4 BG. O66 (1GS6) co cccccevevceceseves 24
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806
8 * 8 + bias eerrrrerreerCmCe 20

Flanagan v. United States, 565 U.S.
259, 79 L.Ed.2d 288 (1984)....14, 20, 22

Hardin v. Wainwright,

678 F.2d 5869 (Sth Cir. 1982) ccccccccecs 18
Hohn v. United States, 524 U.S. 236,

$44 Be. 26 242 CIOS9SP ccccsscecesoetece 2
Linton v. Perini,

656 F.24 207 (6th Cir. 1981) cccccce oot
Matthews v. DeCastro, 429 U.S. 286,

SS WeceRG. 2B1 (U9ED) co ccccvcctossccccesce 24
Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003)...... vr rrr 23, 24
Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1,

144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999).....cc0e rrr ey 22
Nettles v. Wainwright,

677 FV. GO6 CSG GSP. BM9SBlccecucseées 18
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45,

77 LeBG. 156 (1932) ccccccces deecesctes 12

Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509,
sm FS By, Bel. +} Perrrerrrrrrrre rr. 24

viii

Page
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 423,
146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2002)......+... secceces 23
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985)..... 18, 19

United States v. Brown,
299 F.3d 1252 (11th Cir. 2002)....15, 17

United States v. Garcia,

en ee Cee Cee. TOIT). ccccecece 21
United States v. Koblitz,
803 F.3d 1525 (11th Cir. 1986)........ 12

United States v. Renfro, 620 F.2d
497 (5th Cir. 1980).10,14,15,16,17,18,19

United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d
ME oS a +} 10, 317, 16, 939

STATUTES AND RULES CITED

21 U.S.C. § BAl(ad(Tp ccc ccccccccces 4, 5
21 U.S.C. § B4lT(D)(1)(A).....22 eee ecveed
Zt U.B8.C. §& G4Gecccccccccccccccccccs 4, 5
28 U.S.C. § T254(T) ccccccccccccccccecs 2
26 U.8.C. | V2 ccccccces cocccdy 14,-16
2B U.S.C. § B28Secccccccccccccccccccecs 2
2B U.S.C. | 2258S cccccccccecs 2, 7, 8, 21
Federal Rule of Appellate

PFOCOGUTE AD cccccccccwcccceccccccceces 9

Federal Rule of Criminal
Derr SPU peocecccecceeeceeeeeeoese 16

Eleventh Circuit Local Rules 27-1(b),
-27-1(g), ANG 2-2. ccc cece eeceescceseces a

ix

Page

~- CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY
PROVISIONS

Due process clause of the Fifth
Amendment......+++-+3, 10, 11, 15, 19, 25

Equal protection of the Fourteenth
Amendment incorporated into the due
process clause of the Fifth Amendment
coccccccscccccccccoss WO, 191, 15, 19, 2S

Right to choice of counsel under the
Sixth Amendment..... eft ft © eeereeeeeeeeeeee
Lebecwbetvdecesosueed 7, 11, 12, 15, 20, 22

Statutory right to a criminal appeal,
WYTTTTTITITITITITTTT TTT 11, 22, 25

- PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that he
has complied with Supreme Court Rule
29(4) by causing an exact copy of this
petition for writ of certiorari to be
delivered to the Solicitor General of
the United States, Room 5614, Department
of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.,
Washington, DC 20530-0001, by depositing
a copy of same into a U.S. Postal Mail
Box located inside of the United States
Postal Office at Lake and LaSalle Streets
Chicago, Illinois on August 19, 2005, to
be delivered as first-class mail.

ove \Sullel 6 Cllr

Michael B. Cohen
35 E. Wacker Drive
Suite 595

Chicago, IL., 60601

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Terry Allen, hereinafter referred to
herein as "Allen," petitions the Supreme
Court of the United States to review the
decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided
on April 21, 2005, in Case No. 95-10222,
that is directly related to a decision
entered by the Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals on November 26. 2002, in Case No.
02-11918, entitled United States v. Terry
Wayne Allen.

JUDGMENT AND OPINION BELOW

The order of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit -s set
out in the Appendix at E. This order has
a relationship to a prior unpublished de-
cision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals that is set out in the Appendix at
A.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386016_0126%3A0. Public record. Not legal advice.