No. 22-7589
Troy G. Saxton v. Jay Forshey, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2253 brown-v-ohio certificate-of-appealability double-jeopardy drug-possession habeas habeas-corpus reasonable-jurists spatial-units
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a habeas petitioner satisfies his burden under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2) for the issuance of a certificate of appealability when he demonstrates that "reasonable jurists" could debate whether state authorities "carved up" a single drug possession offense into multiple spatial units in a manner contrary to Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 (1977) for purposes of subjecting him to multiple punishments for the same crime in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a habeas petitioner satisfies his burden under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2) for the issuance of a certificate of appealability
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-06-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-08
Waiver of right of respondent Jay Forshey to respond filed.
2023-05-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 20, 2023)
Attorneys
Jay Forshey
Michael Jason Hendershot — Ohio Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Troy G. Saxton
Dennis C. Belli — Petitioner