No. 18-1369

James Bradley Anderson v. Washington

Lower Court: Washington
Docketed: 2019-05-01
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: bill-of-particulars criminal-procedure double-jeopardy due-process ineffective-assistance jury-instructions pre-trial-notice prosecutorial-discretion
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

Must the particulars of each count of an information be specified prior to trial, or can a prosecutor be allowed to match alleged acts to the counts in closing arguments?

Where the appeals court has held that the jury was not clear that the various counts needed to be based on separate acts, should the convictions be vacated under the plain error doctrine?

Has a defense attorney provided ineffective assistance where she proposes instructions that fail to object to the double jeopardy and abet in the confusion on the counts?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Must the particulars of each count of an information be specified prior to trial, or can a prosecutor be allowed to match alleged acts to the counts in closing arguments?

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-04-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 31, 2019)
PetitionAppendixCertificate of Word CountProof of Service
2019-02-21
Application (18A848) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until April 27, 2019.
2018-02-16
Application (18A848) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 26, 2019 to April 27, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Main DocumentLower Court Orders/Opinions

Attorneys

James B. Anderson
James Bradley Anderson — Petitioner