No. 23-7474
Bogdan Nicolescu v. Dave Bobby, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-procedure appellate-review court-of-appeals due-process judicial-discretion judicial-explanation merits-panel pro-se-litigant procedural-fairness uncandid-briefing
Latest Conference:
2024-06-13
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is a 3-judge merits panel of a U.S. court of appeals at liberty, perhaps over-reliant on the opposing party's counseled but uncandid briefing, to not consider a pro se litigant's meritorious argument in reaching its judgment, and to still not consider it on panel rehearing, still without offering any explanation?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is a 3-judge merits panel of a U.S. court of appeals at liberty, perhaps over-reliant on the opposing party's counseled but uncandid briefing, to not consider a pro se litigant's meritorious argument in reaching its judgment, and to still not consider it on panel rehearing, still without offering any explanation?
Docket Entries
2024-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2024.
2024-05-22
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-04-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 14, 2024)
Attorneys
Bogdan Nicolescu
Bogdan Nicolescu — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent