Question Presented (from Petition)
1. When a state court expressly refuses to consider a petitioner's constitutional claim, has that court nevertheless adjudicated that claim "on the merits" for purposes of § 2254(d)?
2. Has this Court clearly established, through over a century of Eighth Amendment proportionality cases, that "challenges to the length of term-of-years sentences given all the circumstances in a particular case," Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 59 (2010), extend to the aggregate length of multiple sentences?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a state court's express refusal to consider a petitioner's constitutional claim constitutes an adjudication on the merits under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)
2023-07-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-27
Reply of petitioner Atdom Mikels Patsalis filed.
2023-06-16
Brief of respondent Ryan Thornell, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, et al. in opposition filed.
2023-05-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 16, 2023.
2023-05-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 17, 2023 to June 16, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-04-17
Response Requested. (Due May 17, 2023)
2023-04-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/21/2023.
2023-03-31
Waiver of right of respondent Ryan Thornell, et al. to respond filed.
2023-03-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 26, 2023)
2023-01-12
Application (22A630) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until March 24, 2023.
2022-01-10
Application (22A630) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 23, 2023 to March 24, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.