Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

A. Cert Grants

State v. John Mull, 2020AP1362, petition for review of a per curiam opinion granted, 5/18/22, case activity (including briefs) Question Presented (from petition): Under binding case law, in reviewing an ineffective assistance claim, the court must defer to a trial attorney’s strategic decisions. Here, the circuit court found Mull’s attorney used reasonable strategies in choosing… Read more

{ 1 comment }

Greer v. United States, No. 19-8709, cert. granted 1/11/21; SCOTUSblog page Question presented:  Whether, when applying plain-error review based on an intervening United States Supreme Court decision, Rehaif v. United States, a circuit court of appeals may review matters outside the trial record to determine whether the error affected a defendant’s substantial rights or impacted the… Read more

{ 0 comments }

United States v. Gary, No. 20-444, cert granted 1/8/21; SCOTUSblog page Question presented: Whether a defendant who pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm as a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and 924(a), is automatically entitled to plain error relief if the district court did not advise him that one element of that offense… Read more

{ 0 comments }

United States v. Palomar-Santiago, No. 20-437, cert granted 1/8/21; SCOTUSblog page Question presented: Whether charges that a non-citizen illegally reentered the United States should be dismissed when the non-citizen’s removal was based on a misclassification of a prior conviction. Under 8 U.S.C. §1326(d), a district court must dismiss an indictment for illegal reentry after deportation… Read more

{ 0 comments }

United States v. Davis, USSC No. 18-431, June 24, 2019, affirming and vacating in part, United states v. Davis, 903 F.3d 483 (5th Cir. 2018); Scotusblog page (includes links to briefs and commentary) No surprise here.  Section 18 U.S.C. §924(c) makes it a crime to use a firearm during a crime of violence and 18 U.S.C. §924(c)(3)(B) defined… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Banister v. Davis, USSC No. 18-6943, certiorari granted 6/24/19 Question presented: Whether and under what circumstances a timely Rule 59(e) motion should be recharacterized as a second or successive habeas petition under Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524 (2005). Decision below: Banister v. Davis, unpublished order dismissing appeal (5th Cir. May 8, 2018) USSC Docket… Read more

{ 0 comments }

McKinney v. Arizona, USSC No. 18-1109, certiorari granted 6/10/19; affirmed 2/25/20 Questions presented: 1. Whether the Arizona Supreme Court was required to apply current law when weighing mitigating and aggravating evidence to determine whether a death sentence is warranted 2. Whether the correction of error under Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982), requires resentencing… Read more

{ 0 comments }

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 }