|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-7835||Ala. Crim. App.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2016|
Issue: Whether a state court can enforce a rule that Brady v. Maryland does not apply to impeachment evidence when the Supreme Court has held that Brady does apply to impeachment evidence.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 2 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 10, 2017)|
|Mar 3 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 10, 2017.|
|Mar 10 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Death Row Exoneree 138 Anthony Graves filed.|
|Apr 7 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including May 10, 2017.|
|May 10 2017||Brief of respondent Alabama in opposition filed.|
|May 19 2017||Reply of petitioner Toforest Onesha Johnson filed.|
|May 24 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 8, 2017.|
|Jun 12 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 15, 2017.|
|Jun 19 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 22, 2017.|
|Jun 26 2017||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of the position asserted by the respondent in its brief filed on May 10, 2017. The CHIEF JUSTICE, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS, JUSTICE ALITO, and JUSTICE GORSUCH join, dissenting: The Court vacates the judgment below in light of the position asserted by the respondent in its brief. That position is that the Court should vacate a state court judgment for further consideration in light of Ex parte Beckworth, 190 So. 3d 571 (Ala. 2013). Beckworth is a state court decision that turns entirely on state procedural law. It was expressly called to the attention of the state courts, which declined to upset the decision below in light of it. Reply to Pet. for Cert. 2, n. 1. The question presented concerns state collateral reviewpurely a creature of state law that need not be provided at all. Whatever ones view on the propriety of our practice of vacating judgments based on positions of the parties, see Hicks v. United States, 582 U. S. ___ (2017), the Courts decision to vacate this state court judgment is truly extraordinary. I respectfully dissent.|
|Jul 28 2017||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jul 28 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.
Congratulations to Gail Curley, the new Marshal of the Supreme Court. The Marshal supervises the Court's police, cries in the Court with the familiar "Oyez," and (somewhat oddly) is responsible for paying the Justices' salaries. https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1389212773108920323
JUST IN: If you’re the kind of person always expecting the Marshal of the Supreme Court to make an arrest, there’s a new sheriff in town #SCOTUS
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.