No. 19-8879
Gurminder Sekhon v. California
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process eighth-amendment excessive-fines judicial-process standing trial-transcript
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
DiD THE TRIAL COURT VIOUATE PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO PRESENT A DEFENSE UNDER BOTH STATE ANJ FEDERAL CONSTiTUTIONS?
IN LIGHT OF JACKSON v. VIRGINA, WAS THERE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO APPLYINE KIDNAPPING ENHANCEMETS Tò COUNTS SIX AND SEVEN?
DiD THE COURT VIOLATE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION WHEN it FAICED TO IN STRUCT ON AUL THE ELEMENTS of THE ALTERNATVE PENALTY PROViSiON?
Dil THE FAILURE COURT'S to ALL te IN STRUCT ON ELEMENTS 7424 244 50 THE ENHANCEMENT VIOLATE CONSTITUTION?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the courts violate the petitioner's due process rights by rejecting a defense under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on excessive fines?
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-21
Waiver of right of respondent California to respond filed.
2020-06-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 31, 2020)
Attorneys
Gurminder Sekhon
Gurminder Sekhon — Petitioner
Gurminder Sekhon v. California