No. 19-6976
James Clayton Johnson v. Arizona
IFP
Tags: arizona capital-punishment constitutional-challenge cruel-and-unusual-punishment death-penalty due-process evidentiary-hearing factual-findings meaningful-opportunity standing
Latest Conference:
2020-02-21
Question Presented (from Petition)
Does a court deprive a capital defendant of his due process right to a meaningful opportunity to be heard when the defendant challenges the constitutionality of a state's capital punishment scheme and asks to present previously unexamined evidence on the issue, but the court denies his request for an evidentiary hearing and factual findings?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does a court deprive a capital defendant of his due process right to a meaningful opportunity to be heard when the defendant challenges the constitutionality of a state's capital-punishment scheme and asks to present previously unexamined evidence on the issue, but the court denies his request for an evidentiary hearing and factual findings?
Docket Entries
2020-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2020-01-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-24
Reply of petitioner James Johnson filed.
2020-01-16
Brief of respondent State of Arizona in opposition filed.
2019-12-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 16, 2020)
Attorneys
James Johnson
State of Arizona
Ginger Jarvis — Attorney General's Office, Respondent