No. 18-9600
Patricia Diane Smith Sledge v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure district-court due-process evidence-rules evidentiary-ruling federal-rules-of-evidence procedural-error sufficiency-of-evidence summary-evidence witness-tampering
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the district court prejudicially err when admitting Exhibit 1 as a summary pursuant to Fed Rules of Evidence, rule 1006?
Was the evidence sufficient to support the witness tampering convictions?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the district court prejudicially err when admitting Exhibit 1 as a summary pursuant to Fed Rules of Evidence, rule 1006?
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 of America to respond filed.
2019-06-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 10, 2019)
Attorneys
Patricia Sledge
Karren Kenney — Kenney Legal Defense, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent