No. 21-7827
Stephen Luis Haro v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: confrontation-clause due-process evidence-rule fair-trial government-negligence material-witness sixth-amendment trial-court
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment Immigration
FifthAmendment Immigration
Latest Conference:
2022-06-02
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the trial court deprived Haro of his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation when it admitted at trial the unconfronted, out-of-court testimony of a material witness, ignoring the mandate of Fed. R. Evid. 804(a)(5), where the Government's negligence had rendered the witness unavailable?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the trial court deprived Haro of his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation when it admitted at trial the unconfronted, out-of-court testimony of a material witness, ignoring the mandate of Fed. R. Evid. 804(a)(5), where the Government's negligence had rendered the witness unavailable?
Docket Entries
2022-06-06
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022.
2022-05-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2022-05-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 9, 2022)
Attorneys
Stephen Haro
Ezekiel E. Cortez — Law Offices of Ezekiel E. Cortez, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent