|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-1428||9th Cir.||Mar 3, 2015||Jun 18, 2015||5-4||Alito||OT 2014|
Holding: Any federal constitutional error that may have occurred by excluding the attorney for a defendant in a capital murder trial from part of the Batson hearing was harmless.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 18, 2015. Justice Kennedy and Justice Thomas filed concurring opinions. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 27 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 30, 2014)|
|Jun 18 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including July 30, 2014.|
|Jul 21 2014||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including August 13, 2014.|
|Aug 13 2014||Brief of respondent Hector Ayala in opposition filed.|
|Aug 26 2014||Reply of petitioner Kevin Chappell, Warden filed.|
|Aug 27 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014.|
|Oct 6 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 10, 2014.|
|Oct 14 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 17, 2014.|
|Oct 20 2014||Petition GRANTED In addition to the question presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: "Whether the court of appeals properly applied the standard articulated in Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619 (1993)."|
|Oct 30 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including December 11, 2014.|
|Oct 30 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 20, 2015.|
|Dec 9 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Dec 9 2014||Brief of petitioner Kevin Chappell, Warden filed.|
|Dec 22 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, March 3, 2015|
|Dec 22 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Dec 22 2014||Record from U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Jan 7 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Jan 9 2015||Record received from U.S.D.C. Southern District of California, (12 Boxes, one box of the record is SEALED)|
|Jan 20 2015||Brief of respondent Hector Ayala filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 12 2015||Letter from counsel for the petitioner regarding change in party name.|
|Feb 18 2015||Reply of petitioner Ron Davis, Acting Warden filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 3 2015||Argued. For petitioner: Robin Urbanski, California Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, Cal. For respondent: Anthony J. Dain, San Diego, Cal.|
|Jun 18 2015||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., and Thomas, J., filed concurring opinions. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 13 2015||Petition for Rehearing filed.|
|Jul 16 2015||DISTRIBUTED.|
|Aug 10 2015||Rehearing DENIED.|
|Aug 10 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 11 2015||Records from the 9th Circuit and from U.S.D.C. Southern District of California has been returned.|
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.