|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1511||Ind. Ct. App.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether Miller v. Alabama applies to discretionary sentences of life without parole imposed for juvenile offenses, as 16 states have held, or whether it is limited to mandatory sentences of life without parole, as 10 others have found; and (2) whether an evidentiary hearing is required to assess whether juveniles sentenced before Miller are irreparably corrupt.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 05 2018||Application (17A952) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 19, 2018 to May 3, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Mar 08 2018||Application (17A952) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until May 3, 2018.|
|May 03 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 6, 2018)|
|May 21 2018||Brief amici curiae of Juvenile Law Center, et al. filed.|
|May 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Indiana Public Defender Council Juvenile Defense Project filed.|
|Jun 04 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 6, 2018 to August 5, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 08 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 6, 2018.|
|Aug 03 2018||Brief of respondent State of Indiana in opposition filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Reply of petitioner Larry W. Newton filed.|
|Aug 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.|
|Sep 11 2018||Rescheduled.|
|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.|
|Feb 25 2020||Supplemental brief of petitioner Larry W. Newton filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.|
|Feb 27 2020||Supplemental brief of respondent State of Indiana filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.|
|Apr 22 2021||Supplemental brief of petitioner Larry W. Newton filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 26 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.|
|Apr 28 2021||Supplemental brief of respondent State of Indiana filed. (Distributed)|
|May 03 2021||Petition DENIED.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...