Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the appellate court err in its interpretation of Apodaca Bad Bertrand? In this first degree murder prosecution, the jury returned an eleven-to-one guilty vote. Relying on La. C.Cr.P. Art. 782(A), the appellate court concluded that only ten jurors needed to vote guilty to produce a constitutional verdict under Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972), and State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La. 3/17/09), 6 So.3d 738.1. Louisiana recently voted to change its Constitution to require unanimous verdicts in non-capital cases, where they were not required before. In 2007, without amending the Constitution, the Legislature amended La. R.S. 14:30(C) to give prosecutors a unilateral power to procure first degree murder convictions without unanimous verdicts.
Can the 2007 legislative amendment to La. R.S. 14:30(C) qualify, absent a constitutional amendment, as the "attendant provision " necessary to change the classification of a charged capital offense?
Is the 2007 amendment to La. R.S. 14:30(C) also unconstitutional because it is redundant to the same provisions found in La. R.S. 14:30.1?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the appellate court err in its interpretation of Apodaca and Bertrand?
2020-04-27
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Ramos</i> v. <i>Louisiana</i>, 590 U. S. ___ (2020). Justice Alito, concurring in the decision to grant, vacate, and remand: In this and in all other cases in which the Court grants, vacates, and remands in light of <i>Ramos</i> v. <i>Louisiana</i>, I concur in the judgment on the understanding that the Court is not deciding or expressing a view on whether the question was properly raised below but is instead leaving that question to be decided on remand. Justice Thomas would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari.
2020-04-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/24/2020.
2019-11-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2019.
2019-11-12
Brief of respondent Louisiana in opposition filed.
2019-09-26
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part; the time is extended to and including November 12, 2019.
2019-09-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 11, 2019 to December 10, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-09-11
Response Requested. (Due October 11, 2019)
2019-09-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-23
Waiver of right of respondent Louisiana to respond filed.
2019-07-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 26, 2019)