Pending Criminal Cases in SCOTUS
Thanks to the folks at the Central Illinois Federal Public Defender's Office, here is a list of the cases in which certiorari has so far been granted for the upcoming term.
1. Florida v. Jardines, No. 11-564
Whether a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained narcotics detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause?
2. Florida v. Harris, No. 11-817
Whether an alert by a well-trained narcotics detection dog certified to detect illegal contraband is insufficient to establish probable cause for the search of a vehicle?
3. Johnson v. Williams, No. 11-465
Whether a habeas petitioner’s claim has been “adjudicated on the merits” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) where the state court denied relief in an explained decision but did not expressly acknowledge a federal-law basis for the claim?
4. Ryan v. Gonzales, No. 10-930
Does 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2) “which provides that an indigent capital state inmate pursuing federal habeas relief "shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys" entitle a death row inmate to stay the federal habeas proceedings he initiated if he is not competent to assist counsel?
5. Tibbals v. Carter, No. 11-218
1) Whether capital prisoners possess a “right to competence” in federal habeas proceedings under Rees v. Peyton; and 2) whether a federal district court can order an indefinite stay of a federal habeas proceeding under Rees?
6. Moncrieffe v. Holder, No. 11-702
Whether a conviction under a provision of state law that encompasses but is not limited to the distribution of a small amount of marijuana without remuneration constitutes an aggravated felony, notwithstanding that the record of conviction does not establish that the alien was convicted of conduct that would constitute a federal felony?
7. Chaidez v. United States, No. 11-820
Whether the Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, holding that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation, applies to persons whose convictions became final before its announcement?
8. Bailey v. United States, No. 11-770
Whether, pursuant to Michigan v. Summers, police officers may detain an individual incident to the execution of a search warrant when the individual has left the immediate vicinity of the premises before the warrant is executed?
9. Smith v. United States, No. 11-8976
Whether withdrawing from a conspiracy prior to the statute of limitations period negates an element of a conspiracy charge such that, once a defendant meets his burden of production that he did so withdrawn, the burden of persuasion rests with the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was a member of the conspiracy during the relevant period – a fundamental due process question that is the subject of a well-developed circuit split?
10. Evans v. Michigan, No. 11-1327
Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial after the trial judge erroneously holds a particular fact to be an element of the offense and then grants a midtrial directed verdict of acquittal because the prosecution failed to prove that fact?
11. Henderson v. United States, No. 11-9307
Whether, when the governing law is unsettled at the time of trial but settled in the
defendant’s favor by the time of appeal, an appellate court reviewing for “plain error” should apply Johnson v. United States’s time-of-appeal standard, as the First, Second, Sixth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits do, or should apply the Ninth Circuit’s time-of-trial standard, which the D.C. Circuit and the panel below have adopted?
12. Descamps v. United States, No. 11-9540
Whether, in a case under the Armed Career Criminal Act, when a state crime does not require an element of the federal crime of burglary, the federal court may find the existence of that element by examining the record of the state proceedings under the "modified categorical approach?”
1. Florida v. Jardines, No. 11-564
Whether a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained narcotics detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause?
2. Florida v. Harris, No. 11-817
Whether an alert by a well-trained narcotics detection dog certified to detect illegal contraband is insufficient to establish probable cause for the search of a vehicle?
3. Johnson v. Williams, No. 11-465
Whether a habeas petitioner’s claim has been “adjudicated on the merits” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) where the state court denied relief in an explained decision but did not expressly acknowledge a federal-law basis for the claim?
4. Ryan v. Gonzales, No. 10-930
Does 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2) “which provides that an indigent capital state inmate pursuing federal habeas relief "shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys" entitle a death row inmate to stay the federal habeas proceedings he initiated if he is not competent to assist counsel?
5. Tibbals v. Carter, No. 11-218
1) Whether capital prisoners possess a “right to competence” in federal habeas proceedings under Rees v. Peyton; and 2) whether a federal district court can order an indefinite stay of a federal habeas proceeding under Rees?
6. Moncrieffe v. Holder, No. 11-702
Whether a conviction under a provision of state law that encompasses but is not limited to the distribution of a small amount of marijuana without remuneration constitutes an aggravated felony, notwithstanding that the record of conviction does not establish that the alien was convicted of conduct that would constitute a federal felony?
7. Chaidez v. United States, No. 11-820
Whether the Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, holding that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation, applies to persons whose convictions became final before its announcement?
8. Bailey v. United States, No. 11-770
Whether, pursuant to Michigan v. Summers, police officers may detain an individual incident to the execution of a search warrant when the individual has left the immediate vicinity of the premises before the warrant is executed?
9. Smith v. United States, No. 11-8976
Whether withdrawing from a conspiracy prior to the statute of limitations period negates an element of a conspiracy charge such that, once a defendant meets his burden of production that he did so withdrawn, the burden of persuasion rests with the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was a member of the conspiracy during the relevant period – a fundamental due process question that is the subject of a well-developed circuit split?
10. Evans v. Michigan, No. 11-1327
Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial after the trial judge erroneously holds a particular fact to be an element of the offense and then grants a midtrial directed verdict of acquittal because the prosecution failed to prove that fact?
11. Henderson v. United States, No. 11-9307
Whether, when the governing law is unsettled at the time of trial but settled in the
defendant’s favor by the time of appeal, an appellate court reviewing for “plain error” should apply Johnson v. United States’s time-of-appeal standard, as the First, Second, Sixth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits do, or should apply the Ninth Circuit’s time-of-trial standard, which the D.C. Circuit and the panel below have adopted?
12. Descamps v. United States, No. 11-9540
Whether, in a case under the Armed Career Criminal Act, when a state crime does not require an element of the federal crime of burglary, the federal court may find the existence of that element by examining the record of the state proceedings under the "modified categorical approach?”
posted by Anonymous at 11:28 AM
<< Home