No. 23-6471

Edward J. Steiner v. Brent Kempster, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-01-12
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process free-speech standing video-evidence
Latest Conference: 2024-03-15
Question Presented (from Petition)

(j3/'/W^xrs 0-4
(^p) T7\e £ f 1 on<, 5-fr<c^^ »A/
ft>fh£. ca <S^,/
A 7 v/ickso^ C Ic'^' 1 1 d-Ac, i£ fo f^
(^jy h/ »71 f Ki S case A of ^eTs f\l^ t ^ fc^-fare H'C CA-crf 5
ibe ■for f'^e jac)<£ of- u,^ c(f iZ&^S *
(p i/l Aeo .
(|) ifwuli <A5CS fed M«< ^ M0\ be\ft&ascl,Ai<fc\cf co^ri <xft v^ry //^rfW

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the district court erred in striking the motions as untimely, which are important to the case involving video evidence and tampering issues that impact the rights of U.S. citizens

Docket Entries

2024-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2024.
2023-12-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 12, 2024)

Attorneys

Edward J. Steiner
Edward James Steiner — Petitioner