No. 21-8054
Carlos Johnson v. Dan Reddington, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: confrontation confrontation-clause constitutional-rights crawford-v-washington criminal-procedure due-process evidence-law habeas-corpus hearsay probation-revocation
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)
To guarantee fairness, should criminal defendants in probation revocation proceedings be provided under the due process clause with a more robust right to confrontation that is similar to that provided in criminal prosecutions under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether criminal defendants in probation revocation proceedings should be provided a more robust right to confrontation under the due process clause, similar to that provided in criminal prosecutions under Crawford v. Washington
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-27
Waiver of right of respondent Dan Reddington to respond filed.
2022-05-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 5, 2022)
Attorneys
Carlos Johnson
Kevin Louis Schriener — Law & Schriener, LLC, Petitioner
Dan Reddington
D. John Sauer — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent