Lee v. Giroux et al
| Marcale Anthony Lee |
| Nancy Giroux and PA State Attorney General |
| 3:2014cv00772 |
| April 22, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Mercer |
| JV |
| Richard P. Conaboy |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
21
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)Finally, Lee argues that Gail F. Souders, Esquire, the attorney who represented him during the PCRA proceedings was ineffective for failing to claim that attorney Kovatch had a conflict of interest , i.e., after the May, 2009, jury trial attorney Kovatch allegedly had a dispute with Lee regarding attorneys fees. First, it is not at all clear how this alleged conflict impacted attorney Kovatchs performance up to the time of the jury verdict and the imposition of sentence. Second, this is a claim of ineffective assistance of PCRA counsel which is barred by Coleman. As stated in footnote 7, the Supreme Court in Martinez only excused a procedural default of a claim that trial counsel was gu ilty of ineffective assistance. Martinez did not hold that ineffective assistance of PCRA counsel was an independent basis for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.An appropriate order will be entered. (See Memorandum)Date: August 12, 2015Signed by Honorable Richard P. Conaboy on 8/12/15. (cc)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
