No. 22-589
Daryl Holloway v. City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, et al.
Tags: circuit-split civil-rights constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process eyewitness-identification identification-procedure law-enforcement lineup qualified-immunity
Latest Conference:
2023-03-31
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the Court should address
ambiguity among the circuits on whether an unduly
suggestive identification procedure violated the Due
Process Clause when officers organized a lineup one
day after showing a single photo to victims who never
saw their attacker?
2. Whether the Court should reverse the
doctrine of qualified immunity because of its absence
in the Constitution and federal law?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Court should address ambiguity among the circuits on whether an unduly suggestive identification procedure violated the Due Process Clause
Docket Entries
2023-04-03
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/31/2023.
2023-03-09
Reply of petitioner Daryl Holloway filed.
2023-02-27
Brief of respondents City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, et al. in opposition filed.
2023-01-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 27, 2023.
2023-01-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 26, 2023 to February 27, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-12-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 26, 2023)
2022-10-27
Application (22A352) granted by Justice Barrett extending the time to file until December 21, 2022.
2022-10-25
Application (22A352) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 6, 2022 to December 21, 2022, submitted to Justice Barrett.
Attorneys
City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, et al.
Jennifer Lynn Williams — Milwaukee City Attorney's Office, Respondent
Daryl Holloway
Nathaniel Cade Jr. — Cade Law Group LLC, Petitioner