|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1026||Idaho -||Oct 30, 2018||Feb 27, 2019||6-3||Sotomayor||OT 2018|
Holding: The presumption of prejudice for Sixth Amendment purposes recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega applies regardless of whether a defendant has signed an appeal waiver.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on February 27, 2019. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined and in which Justice Alito joined as to Parts I and II.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 23 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 23, 2018)|
|Feb 21 2018||Waiver of right of respondent State of Idaho to respond filed.|
|Feb 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Ethics Bureau at Yale filed.|
|Feb 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Idaho Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Mar 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/23/2018.|
|Mar 08 2018||Response Requested. (Due April 9, 2018)|
|Mar 16 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 9, 2018 to June 8, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 16 2018||Response to motion to extend the time to file a response from petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|Mar 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part, and the time is extended to and including May 15, 2018.|
|May 08 2018||Brief of respondent State of Idaho in opposition filed.|
|May 21 2018||Reply of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|May 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/7/2018.|
|Jun 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.|
|Jun 18 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 21 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 03 2018||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 10, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 17, 2018.|
|Jul 17 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr.|
|Aug 10 2018||Brief of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amici curiae of Idaho Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Ethics Bureau at Yale filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|Aug 20 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 30, 2018|
|Aug 24 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Sep 10 2018||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Idaho.|
|Sep 12 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief of respondent State of Idaho filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amici curiae of Louisiana, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 09 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.|
|Oct 17 2018||Reply of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 30 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Amir H. Ali, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Lead Deputy Attorney General, Boise, Idaho; and Allon Kedem, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae).|
|Feb 27 2019||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined, and in which Alito, J., joined as to Parts I and II.|
|Apr 01 2019||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Apr 01 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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 ...
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.