|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-8842||Ariz. Ct. App.||Not Argued||Oct 31, 2016||TBD||Per Curiam||OT 2016|
Issue: (1) Whether a sentencing judge's exercise of discretion not to impose a death sentence is the functional equivalent of the findings required under Montgomery v. Louisiana to impose a sentence of life without parole on a juvenile offender; and (2) if not, whether the court should vacate the decision of the Arizona Court of Appeals and remand for further consideration in light of Montgomery.
Judgment: Granted, vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion on October 31, 2016. Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 4 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2016)|
|Apr 13 2016||Waiver of right of respondent Arizona to respond filed.|
|May 4 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 19, 2016.|
|May 16 2016||Response Requested . (Due June 15, 2016)|
|May 27 2016||Brief of respondent Arizona in opposition filed.|
|Jun 9 2016||Reply of petitioner Bobby Charles Purcell filed.|
|Jun 16 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 26, 2016.|
|Oct 3 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 7, 2016.|
|Oct 11 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 14, 2016.|
|Oct 24 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 28, 2016.|
|Oct 31 2016||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 Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ____ (2016). Justice Sotomayor concurs in the decision to grant, vacate, and remand. See Tatum v. Arizona, 580 U.S. ___ (2016) (Sotomayor, J., concurring). Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins, dissents from the decision to grant, vacate, and remand. See Tatum v. Arizona, 580 U.S. ___ (2016) (Alito, J., dissenting)|
|Dec 2 2016||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Dec 2 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. He’s flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
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.