No. 19-5806
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: confidential-informant confrontation-clause criminal-procedure drug-transaction due-process evidence evidence-admission sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
Privacy
Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT'S ERRONEOUS ADMISSION OF A VIDEO OF AN ALLEGED DRUG AND FIREARM TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE CI AND THE DEFENDANT VIOLATED THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE OF THE SIXTH AMENDMENT?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's erroneous admission of a video of an alleged drug-and-firearm transaction between the CI and the defendant violated the confrontation-clause
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-02
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-10-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 2, 2019.
2019-10-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 31, 2019 to December 2, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-01
Response Requested. (Due October 31, 2019)
2019-09-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.
2019-09-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-08-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 4, 2019)
Attorneys
John Bradham
Robin Farnsworth — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent