No. 19-8015
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: bruton-rule co-defendant-statement codefendant-statement confrontation-clause criminal-appeal criminal-procedure eleventh-circuit non-testimonial non-testimonial-statement severance
Latest Conference:
2020-04-17
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the United States Court of Appeal Eleventh Circuit erred in finding that the Bruton rule, does not mandate a severance when a non-testifying codefendant statement inculpates my client, since the co-defendant's statement which inculpates my client is non testimonial.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the United States Court of Appeal Eleventh Circuit erred in finding that the Bruton rule does not mandate a severance when a non-testifying codefendant statement inculpates my client, since the co-defendant's statement which inculpates my client is non testimonial
Docket Entries
2020-04-20
Petition DENIED.
2020-04-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2020.
2020-03-23
Waiver of right of respondent Unites States to respond filed.
2020-03-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 17, 2020)
Attorneys
Gabriel Cruz
Leonardo Spitale Jr. — Leo Spitale, Jr. P.A., Petitioner
Unites States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent