This edition of “Petitions to watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices' May 19 conference.  These are petitions raising issues that Tom has determined to have a reasonable chance of being granted, although we post them here without consideration of whether they present appropriate vehicles in which to decide those issues.

Johnson v. Bell

Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents the petitioner in this case. It is listed without regard to the likelihood that it will be granted.
Docket: 10-1009
Issue(s): What legal standard governs the determination whether a movant alleging fraud under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to resolve disputed questions of material fact?

Certiorari stage documents:

Martinez v. Regents of the University of California

Docket: 10-1029
Issue(s): (1) Whether a state statute that provides resident tuition rates at public postsecondary institutions to illegal aliens, based on their attendance at high schools in the state, is preempted by 8 U.S.C.§ 1623; (2) whether a court must undertake conflict preemption analysis after concluding that an express preemption provision does not apply in a case involving both types of preemption claims.

Certiorari stage documents:

Johnson v. Haslam

Docket: 10-1149
Issue(s): (1) Whether and to what extent a state may place conditions – such as the payment of restitution or child support – on the restoration of voting rights to people with felony convictions; (2) whether the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, which prohibits states from denying the right to vote based on failure to pay a “poll tax or other tax,” applies to state laws establishing the payment of restitution and child support as a voter qualification; and (3) whether the Sixth Circuit properly held that the Tennessee Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause is not violated by the retroactive application of Tennessee laws that expand a convicted person's disenfranchisement period?

Certiorari stage documents:

The following petitions have been re-listed for the conference of May 19.  If any other paid petitions are re-distributed for this conference, we will add them below as soon as their re-distribution is noted on the docket.

Kawashima v. Holder (Granted )

Docket: 10-577
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that Petitioner's convictions of filing, and aiding and abetting in filing, a false statement on a corporate tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7206(1) and (2) were aggravated felonies involving fraud and deceit under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), and Petitioners were therefore removable.

Certiorari stage documents:

Messerschmidt v. Millender (Granted )

Docket: 10-704
Issue(s): (1) Whether police officers are entitled to qualified immunity when they obtained a facially valid warrant to search for firearms, firearm-related materials, and gang-related items in the residence of a gang member and felon who had threatened to kill his girlfriend and fired a sawed-off shotgun at her? (2) Whether United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), and Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986), should be reconsidered or clarified?

Certiorari stage documents:

Khadr v. Obama

Docket: 10-751
Issue(s): (1) Whether a district court considering a habeas corpus petition may give conclusive effect to the government’s assertion that the individual is unlikely to be tortured if transferred to another country? (2) Whether Section 242(a)(4) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act bars judicial review of claims under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment except in appeals from final orders of deportation, and if so construed, whether Section 242(a)(4) violates the Equal Protection Clause or the Suspension Clause.

Certiorari stage documents:

Rosario v. Griffin

Docket: 10-854
Issue(s): Whether application of New York's state constitutional “meaningful representation” standard to evaluate Sixth Amendment claims of ineffective assistance of counsel results in decisions that are "contrary to, or involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law" as required by the federal habeas statute.

Certiorari stage documents:

Martinez v. Ryan (Granted )

Docket: 10-1001
Issue(s): Whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law from raising on direct appeal any claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim

Certiorari stage documents:

Cavazos v. Smith

Docket: 10-1115
Issue(s): Did the Ninth Circuit on second remand from this Court exceed its authority under the deferential standard for habeas corpus review in 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) by granting relief for insufficient evidence based on its acceptance of the cause-of-death testimony of defense experts over the contrary opinion testimony of prosecution experts?

Certiorari stage documents:



Posted in Cases in the Pipeline

Recommended Citation: Christa Culver, Petitions to watch | Conference of 05.19.11, SCOTUSblog (May. 17, 2011, 8:38 PM),