No. 19-468
Keesha Elayne Frye v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-review burden-of-proof criminal-procedure due-process indictment indictment-redaction jury jury-deliberation jury-instructions meaningful-review redaction standard-of-review
Latest Conference:
2019-12-06
Question Presented (from Petition)
What is the correct standard to determine whether a criminal defendant is denied meaningful appellate review when the district court destroys the only copy of a redacted indictment used by the jury in its deliberations, and who's burden is it to show whether the jury was given the correct version of the indictment?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the criminal defendant was denied meaningful appellate review when the district court destroyed the only copy of a redacted indictment used by the jury in its deliberations
Docket Entries
2019-12-09
Petition DENIED.
2019-11-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2019.
2019-11-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-10-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 8, 2019)
Attorneys
Keesha Elayne Frye
Douglas E. Kingsbery — A209 Fayetteville Street Mall, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent