|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-217||4th Cir.||Oct 16, 2019||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2019|
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred in concluding—in direct conflict with Virginia’s highest court and other courts—that a decision of the Supreme Court, Montgomery v. Louisiana, addressing whether a new constitutional rule announced in an earlier decision, Miller v. Alabama, applies retroactively on collateral review may properly be interpreted as modifying and substantively expanding the very rule whose retroactivity was in question.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 16 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 19, 2018)|
|Aug 31 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 19, 2018 to October 19, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 31 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 19, 2018|
|Sep 18 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc. filed.|
|Oct 19 2018||Brief of respondent Lee Boyd Malvo in opposition filed.|
|Oct 30 2018||Reply of petitioner Randall Mathena filed.|
|Nov 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/30/2018.|
|Nov 29 2018||Rescheduled.|
|Dec 03 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.|
|Dec 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Jan 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.|
|Jan 14 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.|
|Feb 04 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.|
|Feb 19 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.|
|Feb 25 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.|
|Mar 11 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.|
|Mar 18 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Mar 19 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Randall Mathena.|
|Mar 20 2019||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Apr 03 2019||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits is granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 11, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 20, 2019.|
|Jun 11 2019||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Jun 11 2019||Brief of petitioner Randall Mathena filed.|
|Jun 18 2019||Brief amici curiae of States of Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming filed.|
|Jun 18 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jun 18 2019||Brief amici curiae of Jonathan F. Mitchell and Adam K. Mortara filed.|
|Jun 18 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed.|
|Jun 18 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc. filed.|
|Jul 01 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, October 16, 2019.|
|Jul 17 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Aug 01 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Aug 16 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 4th Circuit.|
|Aug 20 2019||Brief of respondent Lee Boyd Malvo filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Isa Nichols, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Current and Former Prosecutors, Department of Justice Officials, and Judges filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of David I. Bruck, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Former WV Delegate John Ellem, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Erwin Chemerinsky, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Juvenile Law Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 28 2019||Record located on PACER (U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia and U.S.C.A. 4th Circuit). Sealed record received from the District Court (4 boxes).|
|Sep 11 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Sep 19 2019||Reply of petitioner Randall Mathena filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 16 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Toby J. Heytens, Solicitor General, Richmond, Va.; and Eric J. Feigin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Danielle Spinelli, Washington, D. C.|
|Feb 24 2020||Stipulation of Dismissal Under Rule 46.1 filed.|
|Feb 26 2020||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
New year, new do!
SCOTUSblog got some new internet digs. Come check out our site redesign. We built it with you in mind.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissents, says immigrant is asking only for "the small grace, to which he is legally entitled, of being allowed to remain in the country while he pursues his substantial claims for relief" https://twitter.com/AHoweBlogger/status/1352779432881217537
#SCOTUS will not block deportation of Haitian immigrant with serious mental illness while he appeals to Fifth Circuit. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a111_8nj9.pdf
Today we Tok’d about cert petitions and the court’s private conference.
Tell us. How do you pronounce certiorari?
We expect orders from the court’s private conference today on Monday morning at 9:30 a.m. EST. Opinions at 10:00 a.m. EST.
Good news! The court will continue live audio streaming for its February sitting.
#SCOTUS announces that during the February argument session, which begins on 2/22, it will once again hear oral arguments by phone, w/live audio available to the public, b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_01-22-21
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.