|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-142||6th Cir.||Mar 29, 2017||Jun 5, 2017||8-0||Sotomayor||OT 2016|
Holding: Because forfeiture pursuant to Section 853(a)(1) of the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984 is limited to property the defendant himself actually acquired as the result of the crime, that provision does not permit forfeiture with regard to Terry Honeycutt, who had no ownership interest in his brother's store and did not personally benefit from the illegal sales.
Judgment: Reversed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on June 5, 2017. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 29 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 31, 2016)|
|Aug 24 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 30, 2016.|
|Sep 19 2016||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including October 31, 2016.|
|Oct 31 2016||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Nov 14 2016||Reply of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed.|
|Nov 15 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 2, 2016.|
|Dec 5 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 9, 2016.|
|Dec 9 2016||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 22 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.|
|Dec 30 2016||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt.|
|Jan 9 2017||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jan 23 2017||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Jan 23 2017||Brief of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed.|
|Jan 30 2017||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Feb 3 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 29, 2017|
|Feb 6 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.|
|Feb 7 2017||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER. One restricted document also received.|
|Feb 22 2017||CIRCULATED.|
|Feb 22 2017||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 20 2017||Reply of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 29 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Brian H. Fletcher, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 5 2017||Judgment REVERSED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Gorsuch, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Jul 7 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.