Lacey v. State
Annotate this CasePetitioner pled guilty to four counts of felony Sexual Intercourse Without Consent and two counts of felony Sexual Assault. On appeal, petitioner challenges the district court's holding that all of petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were either procedurally barred or failed to state a claim. The court concluded that, although petitioner's suppression claims are barred by the procedural and substantive requirements for postconviction petitions, his claims regarding a writ of supervisory control and double jeopardy are not; under the state law when petitioner's trial and appellate counsel defended petitioner, neither provided ineffective assistance regarding the writ of supervisory control and double jeopardy issues; the district court correctly determined that petitioner failed to state a claim for relief in his petition and, as such, did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's motion to hold an evidentiary hearing; and there are no considerations requiring petitioner be appointed counsel in the interests of justice. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.