No. 21-7558

Vitaly Kolosha v. Luke Pettigrew, Warden

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-04-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights congressional-act due-process federal-law free-speech jurisdictional-conflict retroactive-application retroactivity standing state-jurisdiction treaty-interpretation
Latest Conference: 2022-06-02
Question Presented (from Petition)

/. oJtf-efit TtA¥ C&cs/LT M APBS A /2//fTk/<? v ?/+£>*-&
■ A IOO V&ArQs <s>U> 7F-EATy / LAU?,PfaG(l Pt/UdG, OH, A-CLT
of CettG&Mss / /£ 7T ActpOma-t/pa Ley faEr/^ActfuE y o/L
bO£S /T A-PPcy 70 &A-S&S& f7~ PS co*l Ft A. P7&S
OLh GtftSS ?

2, CcPdGd A STATE. OP Pc C/~(Z y ACTS UPbBiL A S>7~F7E CA-UJ
i/t OLATfUcY 77AS STATES STATEHFQh cJfA8-7BfZ_jCOft57t-nX>TtO^
FELbEfLAL- UACO , Adb Act OP Co*f£frESS , ?S /T Ad AcT
OF $&l>}~tiOAl A STATIC SB CBbh/Jc? F&OM THE tPATf&Af cOP /
STATE , Ok bOES TTfAT STATE OF Ft'CO./I / STfaPP^b OP F-c'S
Jl £ P/LS r QaCTA tT (/El Pott/E PS
dodsrf TC/T-tOtf / COMMlY Ad ACT (OF TR&A-S&d AGA^dST
TTE U.S"u/Ad" AGAr'dsr TAGOA bOSS / 7 &A/2.S Mr AT c£GAL STAddcdG
Me. Cf'rlrr /a7u>/2.pmy ?V
TO CSfFALL/FtfSE

3. ujftEA/ A PapsoM )S deta /'a/bd /d a state pUcSgk/
uicTH-OesT A l/AeI £) 0&be£_ OF COM Bd ~ FROM
A lalofcsl cOufaF M-Ai/rWc? <ru/L? s btcrto/T ro J^etav W
hf-tM t'S ( t a 22*41 &d 22S (P mattbtz P /

^, U9HAT i$ peoPBiE ilSMEby ttPH'Od (J<S t 3/ST/TP clF~
COC/faT PEFCSSss TO M&A/L CASS U/HE2.E A
JcfLy pe pcs sea to /Mbtcr pelt;t->om(Br ac/£>
OrfB y&A/E EA fE-P tME t) CSTrTc <l~ A-TTOR.tf/E.Y
P&D&FCUfTEZ)

Question Presented (AI Summary)

When is a new religious word 190 years old treaty, law, prior ruling, or act of congress automatically retroactive, or does it apply to all cases as it reconfirms old ones?

Docket Entries

2022-06-06
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022.
2022-02-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2022)

Attorneys

Vitaly Kolosha
Vitaly Borisovich Kolosha — Petitioner