|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-817||Fla. S. Ct.||Oct 31, 2012||Feb 19, 2013||9-0||Kagan||OT 2012|
Holding: When, subject to challenge by the defendant, the police provide evidence of a drug-sniffing dog’s satisfactory performance in a certification or training program, the dog’s alert can provide probable cause to search a vehicle.
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on February 19, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 21 2011||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 30, 2012)|
|Jan 12 2012||Waiver of right of respondent Clayton Harris to respond filed.|
|Jan 24 2012||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by National Police Canine Association, et al.|
|Jan 25 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 17, 2012.|
|Jan 30 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Commonwealth of Virginia, et al. filed.|
|Jan 31 2012||Response Requested . (Due March 1, 2012)|
|Feb 15 2012||Brief of respondent Clayton Harris in opposition filed.|
|Feb 15 2012||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent.|
|Feb 29 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 16, 2012.|
|Mar 19 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 23, 2012.|
|Mar 26 2012||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by National Police Canine Association, et al. GRANTED.|
|Mar 26 2012||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Mar 26 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|May 9 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 11, 2012.|
|Jun 8 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is further extended to and including June 25, 2012.|
|Jun 25 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jun 25 2012||Brief of petitioner Florida filed.|
|Jun 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Police Canine Association, et al. filed.|
|Jun 29 2012||Brief amici curiae of Commonwealth of Virginia, et al. filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jul 11 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 24, 2012.|
|Jul 23 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, October 31, 2012|
|Aug 2 2012||CIRCULATED|
|Aug 22 2012||Record received from Supreme Court of Florida. (1 envelope)|
|Aug 24 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Aug 24 2012||Brief of respondent Clayton Harris filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 30 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 30 2012||Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 31 2012||Brief amicus curiae of EPIC filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 31 2012||Brief amici curiae of Fourth Amendment Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 31 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2012||Reply of petitioner Florida filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 25 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 31 2012||Argued. For petitioner: Gregory G. Garre, Washington, D. C.; and Joseph R. Palmore, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Glen P. Gifford, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, Fla.|
|Feb 19 2013||Judgment REVERSED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Mar 25 2013||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Apr 23 2013||Record returned to Supreme Court of Florida.|
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
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. He’s flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
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:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
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.