No. 18-6588
Lesley Eugene Warren v. Edward Thomas, Warden
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment character-evidence circuit-split civil-rights death-penalty due-process future-dangerousness parole parole-ineligibility prosecutorial-misconduct sentencing sentencing-procedure simmons-v-south-carolina
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is it an unreasonable application of Simmons v. South Carolina for a State court to deny a parole ineligibility instruction where the prosecution repeatedly implied and suggested that the defendant would kill again if he were not sentenced to death?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is it an unreasonable application of Simmons v. South Carolina for a State court to deny a parole ineligibility instruction where the prosecution repeatedly implied and suggested that the defendant would kill again if he were not sentenced to death?
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-07
Brief of respondent Edward Thomas in opposition filed.
2018-11-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 7, 2019.
2018-11-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 6, 2018 to January 5, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-11-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 6, 2018)
Attorneys
Edward Thomas
Sandra Wallace-Smith — North Carolina Dept. of Justice, Respondent
Lesley Warren