|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-1352||Ohio||Mar 2, 2015||Jun 18, 2015||9-0||Alito||OT 2014|
Holding: The introduction at trial of statements made by a three-year-old boy to his teachers identifying his mother’s boyfriend as the source of his injuries did not violate the Confrontation Clause, when the child did not testify at trial, because the statements were not made with the primary purpose of creating evidence for prosecution.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 18, 2015. Justice Scalia filed an opinion concurring in the judgement, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 11 2013||Application (13A930) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 24, 2014 to May 8, 2014, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Mar 13 2014||Application (13A930) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until May 8, 2014.|
|May 8 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 11, 2014)|
|May 8 2014||Appendix of Ohio filed.|
|May 30 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including July 11, 2014.|
|Jun 5 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association filed.|
|Jun 9 2014||Brief amicus curiae of American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children filed.|
|Jun 11 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment & Appeals Project (DV LEAP) filed.|
|Jun 11 2014||Brief amici curiae of Washington, et al. filed.|
|Jul 1 2014||Brief of respondent Darius Clark in opposition filed.|
|Jul 1 2014||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Darius Clark.|
|Jul 16 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014.|
|Jul 17 2014||Reply of petitioner Ohio filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 2 2014||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Oct 2 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Oct 22 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Oct 22 2014||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent Darius Clark.|
|Oct 22 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Oct 29 2014||Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 14, 2014.|
|Nov 17 2014||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent GRANTED. Jeffrey L. Fisher, Esquire, of Stanford, California, is appointed to serve as counsel for the respondent in this case.|
|Nov 17 2014||Brief of petitioner Ohio filed.|
|Nov 17 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Nov 21 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed.|
|Nov 21 2014||Brief amici curiae of New Mexico, and National District Attorneys Association filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment & Appeals Project (DV LEAP) filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Child Justice, Inc. filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of National Education Association, et al. filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, et al. filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of Fern L. Nesson and Charles R. Nesson filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amicus curiae of American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children filed.|
|Nov 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of Washington, et al. filed.|
|Dec 4 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 7, 2015.|
|Dec 11 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 22 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, March 2, 2015|
|Dec 22 2014||Record requested from Supreme Court of Ohio.|
|Jan 7 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Jan 7 2015||Brief of respondent Darius Clark filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2015||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jan 12 2015||Record received from Supreme Court of Ohio, the record is electronic.|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Innocence Network filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amici curiae of Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amici curiae of Family Defense Center and Other Advocates for Families filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amici curiae of Richard D.Friedman and Stephen J. Ceci filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 14 2015||Brief amici curiae of Southwestern Law Student Bernadette M. Bolan, Professors Norman M Garland, and Michael M. Epstein, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 30 2015||Record received from Ohio 8th District Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County. 1-Box.|
|Feb 4 2015||Reply of petitioner Ohio filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2015||Argued. For petitioner: Matthew Edmund Meyer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Cleveland, Ohio; and Ilana Eisenstein, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal.|
|Jun 18 2015||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.|
|Jul 20 2015||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jul 21 2015||Record from Ohio 8th District Court of Appeals has been returned.|
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...