Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

43. SCOTUS

Kansas v. Glover, USSC No. 18-556, certiorari granted 4/1/19 Question presented: Whether, for purposes of an investigative stop under the Fourth Amendment, it is reasonable for an officer to suspect that the registered owner of a vehicle is the one driving the vehicle absent any information to the contrary. USSC docket; SCOTUSblog page (including links… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Randall Mathena, Warden v. Lee Boyd Malvo, USSC No. 18-217, certiorari granted 3/18/19 Question presented: Montgomery v. Alabama, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016)), held that the new constitutional rule announced in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), applies retroactively to cases on collateral review. Did the the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals err in… Read More

{ 1 comment }

Kansas v. Garcia, USSC No. 17-834, certiorari granted 3/18/19 Questions presented: 1. Whether the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) expressly preempts the States from using any information entered on or appended to a federal Form I-9, including common information such as name, date of birth, and social security number, in a prosecution of any… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Kahler v. Kansas, USSC No. 18-6135, certiorari granted 3/18/10 Question presented: Do the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments permit a state to abolish the insanity defense? Decision below; USSC docket; Scotusblog page As Scotusblog explains, Kahler was convicted of killing his, wife, kids, and his wife’s grandmother, and he was sentenced to death. His lawyers argued… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Evangelisto Ramos v. Louisiana, USSC No. 18-5924, certiorari granted 3/18/19 Question presented: Whether the Fourteenth Amendment fully incorporates the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict? Decision below: State v. Ramos, 231 So.3d 44 (La. App. 2017) USSC Docket Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary) Close on the heels of its decision incorporating… Read More

{ 1 comment }

Timbs v. Indiana, USSC No. 17-1091, February 20, 2019, reversing State v. Timbs, 84 N.E.3d 1179 (Ind. 2017); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary) “The question presented: Is the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause an ‘incorporated’ protection applicable to the States under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause?” The answer: Yes. Like the Eighth… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Garza v. Idaho, USSC No. 17-1026, reversing Garza v. State, 405 P.3d 576 (Idaho 2017);  Scotusblog page (includes links to briefs and commentary) This case involved two plea agreements that included clauses stating that Garza waived his right to appeal. After sentencing, Garza told his lawyer that he wanted to appeal, but his lawyer refused… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Fortunately, Wisconsin does not have the death penalty. However, On Point readers might find this SCOTUS decision Madison v. Alabama, interesting. The government cannot execute a prisoner who is insane or is so mentally ill that he can’t understand the State’s rationale for executing him. Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986) and Panetti v. Quarterman… Read More

{ 0 comments }