No. 18-7675

Eric Hayes v. United States

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2019-01-30
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: abstract-approach circuit-court collateral-appeal constitutional-law crawford-v-washington criminal-appeal daubert-v-merrell-dow double-jeopardy federal-rules-of-evidence illinois-v-vitale sixth-amendment supreme-court-precedent whalen-v-united-states
Latest Conference: 2019-03-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the Third Circuit's denial/rejection that reasonable jurists would not debate the District Court's determination that Mr. Hayes convictions were not obtained in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause, 284 US Blockburger V. United States, 299(1932); United States V. Barrington, 806 the law of Whalen v. United States, 445 US 684, 100 S.Ct. 1432, 63 L.Ed.2d. 715(1980), and Illinois v. Vitale, 447 US 410, 100 S.Ct. 2260, 65 L.Ed.2d. 228(1980), and its progeny?

Whether the Third Circuit's neglect to determine de novoly issues arising from the defendants Sixth Amendment, are reconcilable with law of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms. Inc., 509 US 579, 125 L.Ed.2d. 469, 113 S.Ct. 2786(1993) and Crawford v. Washington, 541 US 36, 59, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d. 177(2004), and its progeny?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the circuit court departed from the established rules of Whalen v. United States and Illinois v. Vitale regarding the double jeopardy clause

Docket Entries

2019-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-09-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 1, 2019)

Attorneys

Eric Hayes
Eric Hayes — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent