No. 20-5815
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-provisions criminal-procedure due-process federalism fundamental-rights grand-jury hurtado-v-california supremacy-clause
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-11-13
Question Presented (from Petition)
I. CAN A STATE CREATE AND ENFORCE CONTRARY LAW, THAT DEPRIVES ITS CITIZENS OF THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, GUARANTEED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?
II. DOES PROSECUTING AN INDIVIDUAL, FOR A CAPITAL OR INFAMOUS CRIME, BY INFORMATION ALONE WITHOUT A PRELIMINARY HEARING, PROVIDE A GREATER VALUE OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS TO THAT INDIVIDUAL, RATHER THAN THOSE GUARANTEED BY A GRAND JURY PROCEEDING?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can a state create and enforce contrary law that deprives its citizens of their fundamental rights, guaranteed by the United States Constitution?
Docket Entries
2020-11-16
Petition DENIED.
2020-10-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.
2020-10-22
Waiver of right of respondent State of Washington to respond filed.
2020-08-11
Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 26, 2020)
Attorneys
Seth John Wilcox
Seth John Wilcox — Petitioner
State of Washington
Peter Benjamin Gonick — Attorney General of Washington, Respondent