No. 20-5870

Demarcus Clark v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-10-01
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: confrontation-clause constitutional-rights criminal-procedure dna-analysis due-process evidence expert-testimony sixth-amendment
Latest Conference: 2020-11-20
Question Presented (from Petition)

(1) Did the State's admission of the Wood/E Vestim/iy and O/M dpotE of a Su/dOaaEe Da/A adalysi l/L lieuoP+hg achial VA/A aflalysT and O/i/Aj'tpof'E . ViolaEeihe PdtiViofled (s S/Y-/A Ame./iA/neA-/' Pi'aM- b 'ConfAonbbo/l; Ufldd/ ihe Srb/ldaOd oP RAlmydbrj \/. A/pxa, /I/ImIco.SLA USrM %Cf.Q1Q5 ?

(2) Whefhw 'bbl counsel violate! the Peti-tia/ief's $Jxvh Ayn&flAtfMZfth f{qhf-fo E-U&ifivg AsshEance of Counsel^ vhdouqh auMu\aVwj£ ewofiS, wh£n coansel-Pa!led Vo CoftducA- ad- independe/ii p/e-bldl i/jvgsEjgafbyl Into -b!(\8 iawS/facis*p lead) nqs, and d/can\sVanaa£ oP+he PeiMoy)e/ }S case?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the State's admission of the ill-court testimony and OWA report of a Surrogate DWA analyst in lieu of the actual testing DWA analyst and DWA report violate the Petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to Confrontation under the standard of Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647?

Docket Entries

2020-11-23
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.
2020-11-02
Waiver of right of respondent Warden Vannoy to respond filed.
Main Document
2020-08-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 2, 2020)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionAppendixProof of Service

Attorneys

Demarcus Clark
Demarcus Clark — Petitioner
Warden Vannoy
Elizabeth Baker Murrill — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent