Daniels v. Kelley

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus. Assuming that petitioner enjoyed a constitutional right to choose counsel whom his parents could afford to retain, and that clearly established law precluded an arbitrary denial of a motion to continue that was designed to facilitate that choice of counsel, petitioner could not demonstrate that he was entitled to relief. In this case, the decision of the Arkansas courts was within the range of reasonableness. The court explained that without an identified counsel of choice and a proposed trial date, the benefits of a continuance were too speculative to show the denial of a clearly established right. View "Daniels v. Kelley" on Justia Law