|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-9490||Cal. App. 1st. Dist.||Jan 21, 2014||Apr 22, 2014||5-4||Thomas||OT 2013|
Holding: Under the totality of the circumstances, the traffic stop precipitated by an anonymous but reliable tip to 911 complied with the Fourth Amendment because the officer had reasonable suspicion that the truck’s driver was intoxicated.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on April 22, 2014. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 29 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 1, 2013)|
|Apr 8 2013||Waiver of right of respondent California to respond filed.|
|Apr 24 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 9, 2013.|
|May 13 2013||The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until June 3, 2013, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.|
|May 31 2013||Petitioners complied with order of May 13, 2013.|
|Jun 5 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013.|
|Jun 11 2013||Response Requested . (Due July 11, 2013)|
|Jul 9 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 12, 2013.|
|Aug 9 2013||Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.|
|Aug 16 2013||Reply of petitioners Lorenzo Prado Navarette and Jose Prado Navarette filed.|
|Aug 22 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013.|
|Oct 1 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Oct 10 2013||Motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis filed by petitioners Lorenzo Prado Navarette and Jose Prado Navarette.|
|Oct 10 2013||Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioners Lorenzo Prado Navarette and Jose Prado Navarette.|
|Oct 28 2013||Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 1, 2013.|
|Nov 4 2013||Motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis GRANTED.|
|Nov 4 2013||Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioners GRANTED. Paul Kleven, Esquire, of Berkeley, California, is appointed to serve as counsel for the petitioners in this case.|
|Nov 4 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT Tuesday, January 21, 2014.|
|Nov 15 2013||Joint appendix filed.|
|Nov 15 2013||Brief of petitioners Lorenzo Prado Navarette and Jose Prado Navarette filed.|
|Nov 21 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Nov 21 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 16 2013||Brief of respondent California filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2013||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 23 2013||Brief amici curiae of Florida, 31 Other States, and the District of Columbia filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 27 2013||Record Received from U.S.C.A. 1st Appellate District. The record is electronic (Not on PACER).|
|Jan 10 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jan 13 2014||Reply of petitioners Lorenzo Prado Navarette and Jose Prado Navarette filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 21 2014||Argued. For petitioners: Paul R. Kleven, Berkeley, Cal. (Appointed by this Court.) For respondent: Jeffrey M. K. Laurence, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, San Francisco, Cal.; and Rachel P. Kovner, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Apr 22 2014||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|May 27 2014||MANDATE ISSUED.|
It's the Great Pumpkin, Chief Justice Roberts.
Our new homepage banner, created by @Courtartist.
A week from today, the Supreme Court will hear argument on the scope of the Second Amendment's right to bear arms. It's a case that could ultimately determine the fate of many gun-control measures around the country. Here's our preview, from @AHoweBlogger:
In major Second Amendment case, court will review limits on carrying a concealed gun in public - SCOTUSblog
The Second Amendment guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” On Nov. 3, the Suprem...
The court has rescheduled oral argument in Shinn v. Ramirez, an important case involving habeas rights and the death penalty, for Dec. 8.
#SCOTUS also issues revised December argument calendar, adding Shinn v. Ramirez (moved to December from November to accommodate Texas cases) on Dec. 8: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/10-26-21-Amended-DEC-2021-Monthly-Argument-Session-Calendar.pdf
#SCOTUS issues order on divided argument in next week's Texas abortion cases, allows Texas to file one consolidated (but oversized) brief for both cases: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/102621zr_o7jp.pdf
Happening now outside SCOTUS: Several dozens supporters of expanding the size of the court are holding a rally. Speakers include Sen. Ed Markey, Sen. Tina Smith, and Rep. Mondaire Jones.
On Friday, the Supreme Court moved the Texas abortion litigation off the shadow docket and onto the "rocket docket." @maryrziegler explains how the expedited schedule is an important shift from how the court initially handled the issue in early September.
Supreme speed: The court puts abortion on the rocket docket - SCOTUSblog
Mary Ziegler is a law professor at Florida State University and the author of Abortion and the Law in America: ...