|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-246||Tex. Crim. App.||Apr 17, 2013||Jun 17, 2013||5-4||Alito||OT 2012|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the co-counsel to the petitioner in this case.
Holding: When petitioner had not yet been placed in custody or received Miranda warnings, and voluntarily responded to some questions by police about a murder, the prosecution’s use of his silence in response to another question as evidence of his guilty at trial did not violate the Fifth Amendment because petitioner failed to expressly invoke his privilege not to incriminate himself in response to the officer’s question.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 17, 2013. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, concurred only in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 24 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 26, 2012)|
|Sep 26 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Sep 26 2012||Waiver of right of respondent Texas to respond filed.|
|Oct 3 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 26, 2012.|
|Oct 10 2012||Response Requested . (Due November 9, 2012)|
|Nov 14 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 10, 2012.|
|Dec 10 2012||Brief of respondent Texas in opposition filed.|
|Dec 19 2012||Reply of petitioner Genovevo Salinas filed.|
|Dec 19 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013.|
|Jan 11 2013||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 29 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jan 29 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Feb 11 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, April 17, 2013|
|Feb 20 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received.)|
|Feb 20 2013||Brief of petitioner Genovevo Salinas filed.|
|Feb 26 2013||Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Liberties Union filed.|
|Feb 27 2013||Brief amicus curiae of American Board of Criminal Lawyers filed.|
|Feb 27 2013||Brief amici curiae of Rutherford Institute, et al. filed.|
|Feb 27 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Mar 6 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Wayne County, Michigan filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 8 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 11 2013||Record from Court Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas is electronic.|
|Mar 22 2013||Brief of respondent Texas filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 29 2013||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 29 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 29 2013||Brief amici curiae of Illinois, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 10 2013||Reply of petitioner Genovevo Salinas filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 12 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 17 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For respondent: Alan K. Curry, Houston, Tex.; and Ginger D. Anders, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Jun 17 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Alito, J., announced the judgment of the Court, and delivered an opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Scalia, J., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 19 2013||Mandate Issued|
Justice Alito will give a speech Thursday at Notre Dame on the shadow docket. At his request, the speech will not be publicly livestreamed or recorded.
Justices Barrett & Thomas also gave recent speeches with no livestream (though video of Thomas' was released after the fact).
When Alito gives a speech Thursday at Notre Dame on the Supreme Court's shadow docket, there will be no livestream or recording. I've confirmed with Notre Dame officials that it was Alito who requested those restrictions.
(To be clear, members of the press can attend in person.) https://twitter.com/KelloggInst/status/1442857286423228430
Just in: New COVID procedures (including PCR tests) for lawyers in advance of the Supreme Court's return to in-person arguments next week.
With less than a week to go b/4 #SCOTUS returns to the courtroom, the Court has posted COVID-19 protocols for lawyers arguing this fall, including a new pre-argument tradition: COVID testing. Full document is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/announcements/Fall_2021_argument_COVID_protocols.pdf
New at SCOTUS: Rick Allen Rhoades, who is set to be executed tomorrow evening in Texas, asks the justices for an emergency stay. Rhoades argues that he has been denied access to trial records that would help him investigate whether the jury selection was tainted by racial bias.
One week from today, the court will begin its new term and the justices will return to the courtroom for the first time since the pandemic hit. Time to dust off those robes and get ready for the first day. Here's our new banner, "back to school" edition, from @Courtartist.
The justices are meeting privately today for their "long conference." Thousands of cert petitions have rolled in over the summer, and the justices use today's conference to discuss which ones they should take up. Here are all the petitions we're watching:
Supreme Court Petitions - ScotusBlog
Comprehensive list of U.S. Supreme Court Petitions including issues, docket, opinions, proceedings, orders, and more.