No. 20-8321
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-subpoena carpenter-exception carpenter-v-united-states fourth-amendment katz-standard katz-v-united-states positive-law-model privacy-expectation reasonable-expectation-of-privacy third-party-doctrine
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
FourthAmendment DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)
Should this Court overrule the third-party doctrine as stated in Miller and Smith as being inconsistent with a reasonable expectation of privacy under Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)?
Alternatively, should this Court find that the third-party doctrine is inconsistent with the Fourth Amendment and adopt the Positive Law Model as described in Justice Gorsuch's dissenting opinion in Carpenter?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should the third-party doctrine be overruled as inconsistent with Katz v. United States?
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-29
Waiver of right of respondent Arizona to respond filed.
2021-06-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 15, 2021)
Attorneys
Arizona
Linley Sarah Wilson — Office of the Arizona Attorney General, Respondent
William Mixton
David Joseph Euchner — Pima County Public Defender's Office, Petitioner