No. 18-9521

Christopher Anthony Jones v. Nevada

Lower Court: Nevada
Docketed: 2019-06-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-statute due-process montgomery-v-louisiana retroactivity substantive-rule supreme-court-precedent teague-exception welch-v-united-states
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

Under the new constitutional rule of retroactivity established in Montgomery v. Louisiana and clarified in Welch v. United States, is a state court required under the federal constitution to retroactively apply interpretations of a substantive criminal statute that narrow its scope?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether due process requires the states to retroactively apply a decision narrowing the interpretation of a substantive criminal statute

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-12
Waiver of right of respondent Steven S. Owens to respond filed.
2019-05-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 3, 2019)
2019-04-05
Application (18A1028) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until May 30, 2019.
2019-04-03
Application (18A1028) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 17, 2019 to May 30, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Christopher Jones
Thomas Kenneth LeeFederal Public Defender for the District of Nevada, Petitioner
Steven S. Owens
Steven S. Owens — Respondent