No. 21-7610
Terry Smith v. Florida, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: autopsy autopsy-testimony confrontation-clause due-process evidence forensic-evidence hearsay medical-examiner sixth-amendment testimony
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-05-12
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Does Florida's practice of allowing a medical examiner to testify to an autopsy he/she did not perform violate the Confrontation Clause when the medical examiner bases his opinion on observations of the absent medical examiner?
2. Does Florida's practice of allowing a medical examiner to testify to an autopsy he/she did not conduct violate the Confrontation Clause when the medical examiner introduces statements from the autopsy report which was not admitted into evidence?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does Florida's practice of allowing a medical examiner to testify to an autopsy he/she did not perform violate the Confrontation Clause?
Docket Entries
2022-05-16
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/12/2022.
2022-04-15
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2022-04-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 16, 2022)
2022-03-09
Application (21A478) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until April 11, 2022.
2022-02-25
Application (21A478) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 10, 2022 to April 11, 2022, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Attorneys
Florida
Carolyn M. Snurkowski — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Terry Smith
Karin Lee Moore — Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, North, Petitioner