No. 21-8000
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review constitutional-interpretation criminal-procedure general-verdict inconsistent-verdicts jury-trial reasonable-doubt sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)
How does this Court's "inconsistent verdicts" jurisprudence reconcile with the Sixth Amendment jury trial guarantee: May a reviewing court uphold a general verdict by relying on a specific fact the jury rejected as not proved beyond a reasonable doubt?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a reviewing court may uphold a general verdict by relying on a specific fact the jury rejected as not proved beyond a reasonable doubt, in light of this Court's 'inconsistent verdicts' jurisprudence and the Sixth Amendment jury trial guarantee
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-10
Waiver of right of respondent State of California to respond filed.
2022-05-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 30, 2022)
Attorneys
Elijah Johnson
Stephen Michael Greenberg — Stephen Greenberg, Attorney at Law, Petitioner
State of California