No. 20-7111
Carlos Lopez-Vanegas v. Pennsylvania
IFP
Tags: appeals civil-rights constitutional-rights criminal-defense criminal-procedure due-process evidence-presentation judicial-interpretation jurisdiction jury-trial state-court
Latest Conference:
2021-04-16
Question Presented (from Petition)
Should be purved n apped process totlly regerded to Direct Appea be properly-conpetent exected Whers the mess rea and actus rea have wotbees presested o Stat lourts Officers t propery dess the atte fcts
Factual Awswer: Stilborne Apped Process
Due Proce of Lbe pesentdpo pri fcifsion t jurywic he ivee i e rdjuy to the see o decs jury at trial
Awsuer ats: Mnivenl its Cherged
the execliow f l, do sight a case for adjudication
Requested Answer: Vu het Kinf ridictio o the court opertsd, er Whii the pubi protet hehet t
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should the 'Speedy Process' globally regarded as a 'Miracle Appeal' be properly adjudicated?
Docket Entries
2021-04-19
Petition DENIED.
2021-03-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.
2020-11-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 15, 2021)
Attorneys
Carlos Lopez-Vanegas
Carlos Lopez-Vanegas — Petitioner