|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.|
🚨 LIVE NOW 🚨 5PM on IGTV #SimplePolitics join me & @AHoweBlogger editor / reporter for the @SCOTUSblog for a great conversation on the recent decisions by the Supreme Court. There is so much to talk about.
SimplePolitics with Kim Wehle - Special Guest Bill Kristol, Editor-At-Large, The Bulwark
Tonight on #SimplePolitics, Bill Kristol and I have an in-depth conversation about Impeachment, what‘s next for ...
ICYMI: We got Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s first majority opinion today.
SCOTUS rules against immigrant who has lived in the US without authorization for decades. The gov't sought to deport him based on a state misdemeanor conviction (he used a fake Social Security card to get a job). SCOTUS says 5-3 he's not eligible to seek protection from removal.
NEW: In Freedom of Information Act case, SCOTUS says federal government does not have to disclose documents that were produced as part of a rulemaking on "cooling water intake structures" under the Clean Water Act. The Sierra Club argued the docs should be disclosed under FOIA.
At 10:00 a.m. EST, the Supreme Court will hand down one or more opinions in argued cases.
We’ll be live blogging through it at 9:45 with @AHoweBlogger, Mark Walsh, and @jamesromoser.
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, March 4 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, March 4, as the court releases opinions from the 2020-21 term. This live ...
SCOTUS will hear oral argument at 10:00 a.m. EST about when claimants must raise claims in the administrative process – “exhausting” their administrative remedies. Read more from Ronald Mann.
It might sound exhausting! But we claim it might be fun.
Justices to weigh issue exhaustion for Social Security claimants - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in Carr v. Saul involves a surprisingly basic question of administrative law: when claimants ...
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.