No. 19-8292

Russell Tinsley v. Sherry Yates, Administrator, Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center, et al.

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2020-04-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: certificate-of-appealability civil-commitment constitutional-law constitutional-provisions due-process fauntleroy-doctrine full-faith-and-credit jurisdiction
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Securities
Latest Conference: 2020-06-18
Question Presented (from Petition)

WHEATHER THE NEW JERSEY CIVIL COMMITMENT OF MR. TINSLEY WAS A VIOLATION OF THE FAUNTLEROY DOCTRINE; AND/OR JURISDICTION OF THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION (ART. IV, SEC. 1), TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 'S JURISDICTION.

WHETHER THE LOWER COURTS ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION FOR DENYING MR. TINSLEY 'S REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the New Jersey civil commitment of Mr. Tinsley was a violation of the Fauntleroy doctrine and/or jurisdiction of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution (Art. IV, Sec. 1), to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's jurisdiction

Docket Entries

2020-06-22
Petition DENIED.
2020-06-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/18/2020.
2020-03-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 18, 2020)

Attorneys

Russell Tinsley
Russell Tinsley — Petitioner