stating failure to anticipate or effectuate change in existing law does not constitute ineffective assistance under Strickland
Summary of this case from Tibbetts v. StateNo. 99-1460.
April 24, 2000, OCTOBER TERM, 1999.
C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 202 F. 3d 276.
stating failure to anticipate or effectuate change in existing law does not constitute ineffective assistance under Strickland
Summary of this case from Tibbetts v. Statereferencing contract law where probation was granted
Summary of this case from Smith v. StateFull title:WATTS v. NETWORK SOLUTIONS, Inc
Court:U.S.
Date published: Apr 24, 2000
In Speth v. State, the court of criminal appeals held that to complain about a community-supervision…
Williams v. StateInd. Post-Conviction Rule 1(5). He now appeals from a negative judgment, and to the extent his appeal turns…