No. 23-7153
Brian J. Dorsey v. David Vandergriff, Warden
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment cruel-and-unusual-punishment death-row deterrence eighth-amendment penological-goals rehabilitation retribution
Key Terms:
Takings Punishment HabeasCorpus Patent JusticiabilityDoctri
Takings Punishment HabeasCorpus Patent JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
When a death-sentenced person has demonstrated that he has been rehabilitated, does the Eighth Amendment prohibit his execution because the penological goals of the death penalty would not be met by executing that person?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When a death-sentenced person has demonstrated that he has been rehabilitated, does the Eighth Amendment prohibit his execution because the penological goals of the death penalty would not be met by executing that person?
Docket Entries
2024-04-09
Petition DENIED.
2024-04-09
Application (23A890) referred to the Court.
2024-04-09
Application (23A890) for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is denied. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
2024-04-08
Brief of respondent David Vandergriff in opposition filed.
2024-04-08
Reply of petitioner Brian J. Dorsey filed.
2024-04-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.
2024-04-07
Application (23A890) for a stay of execution of sentence of death, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
Attorneys
Brian J. Dorsey
Kirk James Henderson — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
David Vandergriff
Gregory Michael Goodwin — Missouri Attorney General's Office, Respondent