No. 21-937
Christopher Lee Holloway v. Minnesota
Response Waived
Tags: based solely on the relative age of the actor violates the constitutional right to equal-protec while permitting it to another affirmative-defense age-discrimination constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process equal-protection federal-law legislative-intent rational-basis
Latest Conference:
2022-02-18
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the denial of an affirmative defense to one class of offenders in a criminal case, while permitting it to another, based solely on the relative age of the actor, violates the constitutional right to equal protection of the laws; and whether the judgment of the Minnesota Supreme Court in this case involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the denial of an affirmative defense to one class of offenders in a criminal case
Docket Entries
2022-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.
2022-01-18
Waiver of right of respondent State of Minnesota to respond filed.
2021-12-20
Attorneys
Christopher Holloway
Daniel L. Gerdts — Daniel L. Gerdts, Lawyer, Petitioner
State of Minnesota
James Eric Haase — Olmsted County Attorney, Respondent