No. 21-7409
Jory Russell Strizich v. Montana
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-defense due-process evidentiary-ruling evidentiary-rulings flight-evidence fourteenth-amendment holmes-precedent holmes-v-south-carolina sixth-amendment
Latest Conference:
2022-04-14
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to defend in a criminal case can be denied on unique state evidentiary rulings? Stated another way, does the state court's evidentiary ruling on admissibility of flight evidence deny the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to defend in a criminal case under Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to defend in a criminal case can be denied on unique state evidentiary rulings?
Docket Entries
2022-04-18
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2022.
2022-03-22
Waiver of right of respondent State of Montana to respond filed.
2022-02-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 18, 2022)
Attorneys
Jory Russell Strizich
Jory Russell Strizich — Petitioner
State of Montana
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent