ROE, WARDEN v. FLORES-ORTEGA

ROE, WARDEN v. FLORES-ORTEGA

Searching through cases, I decided to research the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega appeal case.

After pleading guilty to second-degree murder, the respondent in his case was advised by the judge that he had 60 days to file an appeal. The judge advised him of this after his sentencing. Ms. Kops, his council in charge of his appeal papers, had told him to bring the papers into her file so that she may file a notice. She failed to make the appeal notice, and by the time of the respondent’s appeal, it was rejected as an untimely file. He tried to secure state habeas relief was unsuccessful. He filed a federal habeas petition due to Kops’ failure to fulfill her promise, and file for appeal. Unfortunately for the respondent, the relief was denied by the District Court. The Ninth Circuit reversed showing that the respondent was indeed entitled to relief because the habeas only had to show that his counsel, Kops, has failed to file a notice of appeal. This was without the petitioner’s consent.