Oral Arguments are happening now.View them on the web or via Mobile App on iPhone / iPad or Android (4.0+).

You are here

State v. Fox

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Date: 
Wednesday, October 9, 2013

S-13-0408, State v. Matthew Fox (Appellant)

Lancaster County, Judge Robert Otte

Attorneys: George R. Love (Attorney General’s Office) --- Pro Se Appellant

Civil: Postconviction

Proceedings below: The trial court denied Appellant’s motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.

Issues: The district court erred in (1) failing to find counsel was ineffective in failing to object to instructions No. 7 and 9; (2) finding Appellant was not prejudiced by trial counsel’s failure to seek an opinion of a second expert witness; (3) finding Appellant was not prejudiced by counsel’s failure to raise the issues of erroneous jury instruction s and insufficient evidence on direct appeal; (4) finding Appellant failed to make any factual allegations which demonstrated a denial or infringement of due process; (5) sustaining the State’s motion to deny an evidentiary hearing.

This page was last modified on Wednesday, October 9, 2013