⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Danny Kuehner challenges the legal advice behind his guilty plea. The charges arose from a home invasion in which a ninety-eight-year-old woman was beaten. Kuehner was seventeen when he pleaded guilty to attempted murder and home invasion; he later received thirty-five years in prison. He says his lawyer overstated the victim's injuries and misrepresented a co-defendant's statement to police. Illinois courts rejected his ineffective-assistance claim. He now seeks federal habeas relief, a way to challenge the lawfulness of his custody. Ineffective assistance requires both unreasonable legal representation and resulting harm, called prejudice. For a guilty plea, that means a reasonable probability that proper advice would have led him to reject the plea and insist on trial. Federal habeas review also limits when a court may overturn a state-court decision; mere disagreement is not enough. His lawyer will argue that accurate information would have changed his decision; the warden's lawyer will defend the state courts' reasoning and the benefits of the plea.

Danny Kuehner v. Mark Williams (No. 24-2964) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued October 29, 2026.