No. 21-6396
Tags: circuit-court-conflict circuit-split criminal-procedure criminal-propensity evidence-admissibility federal-rules-of-evidence prejudice prior-bad-acts probative-value propensity-evidence
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-03-25
Question Presented (from Petition)
How are the courts to properly apply Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)? Should they apply the Third Circuit's more substantive approach which requires a close connection between the 404(b) evidence and the material issues in the case, as explained in United States v. Caldwell, 760 F.3d 267 (3d Cir. 2014)? Alternatively, should the courts apply the Eleventh Circuit's more theoretical approach which requires a lower connection between the 404(b) evidence and the material issues in the case as demonstrated in the case at bar?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
How are the courts to properly apply Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)?
Docket Entries
2022-03-11
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2022-03-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/25/2022.
2022-03-08
Stipulation to dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 46 filed. (Received March 10, 2022)
2022-02-23
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2022-01-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including February 23, 2022.
2022-01-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 24, 2022 to February 23, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-12-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 24, 2022.
2021-12-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 23, 2021 to January 24, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-11-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 23, 2021)
Attorneys
Tamara Jeune
Margaret Yvonne Foldes — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent