No. 18-9559
Aracelis N. Ayala v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: article-iii-judges civil-rights criminal-defendants criminal-procedure district-court due-process fifth-amendment individualized-determination judicial-tenure presumption revised-organic-act shackling shackling-policy virgin-islands-court
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
The first question presented is: whether a blanket policy of shackling criminal defendants without an individualized determination of need violates due process?
The second question presented is: can non-Article III judges serve indefinitely?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
whether a blanket policy of shackling criminal defendants without an individualized determination of need violates due process?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-13
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-06-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 5, 2019)
Attorneys
Aracelis N. Ayala
Joseph A. DiRuzzo III — DiRuzzo & Company, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent