No. 20-7729

Casey Rose v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-04-13
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: competency-hearing confrontation-clause cooperating-witness cross-examination due-process impeachment indiana-v-edwards self-representation witness-impeachment
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2021-05-13
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the termination of cross-examination of a cooperating with incentives to lie prior to being able to impeach the witness violated the confrontation clause? If so, can reasonable jurists debate the issues?

Whether allowing a documented schizophrenia defendant to represent himself at trial, and facing a life sentence, violated due process of law by not having a competency hearing in light of Indiana v. Edwards. 171 L. Ed. 2d 345 U.S. 164 (2008)? If so, can reasonable jurists debate this issue?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the termination of cross-examination of a cooperating-witness-with-incentives-to-lie prior to being able to impeach the witness violated the confrontation-clause

Docket Entries

2021-05-17
Petition DENIED.
2021-04-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.
2021-04-20
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-03-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 13, 2021)

Attorneys

Casey Rose
Casey Rose — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent