Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In habeas proceedings arising from petitioner's conviction of first degree sexual assault of a child, defendant's petition for habeas relief is timely as his second section 974.06 motion did toll the time for filing this appeal. However, denial of habeas relief is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in dismissing defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as he suffered no prejudice because the potential outcome at trial would have been the same; 2) it correctly concluded that defendant should be able to collaterally attack the performance of his counsel if he had no real opportunity to raise the issue on direct appeal; and 3) district court correctly dismissed defendant's remaining ineffective assistance claims as his pleas were knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered, and objective evidence reveals that defendant would have accepted the plea deal even if he were aware of the truth-in-sentencing consequences of his crime.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Argued January 8, 2009
Decided September 2, 2009