No. 24-5793
IFP
Tags: acquittal-standard case-law evidence-admissibility judicial-precedent procedural-review ultimate-issue
Latest Conference:
2025-01-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER EVIDENCE FROMAPRIORPROCEEDING WHICH RESULTED
INACQUITTAL SHOULD HAVEBEENDEEMED INADMISSIBLE BECAUSE
THEACQUITTAL DETERMINED ANULTIMATE ISSUECONTRARY TOTHIS
COURT'S HOLDING INDOWNING V.UNITED STATES, 493U.S.342(1990),
WHICH HELDTHATAPRIOR AACQUITTAL DOESNOTBARTHEUSEOF
EVIDENCE FROMTHATPRIORPROCEEDING INASUBSEQUENT CASE
UNLESS THEACQUITTAL DETERMINED ANULTIMATE ISSUE?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether evidence which resulted in acquittal should have been deemed inadmissible based on a prior acquittal's determination of an ultimate issue contrary to Downing v. United States
Docket Entries
2025-01-27
Petition DENIED.
2025-01-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2025.
2024-12-20
Brief of State of Oklahoma in opposition submitted.
2024-12-20
Brief of respondent Oklahoma in opposition filed.
2024-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 20, 2024.
2024-11-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 20, 2024 to December 20, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 20, 2024)
2024-08-21
Application (24A185) granted by Justice Gorsuch extending the time to file until October 12, 2024.
2024-08-01
Application (24A185) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 13, 2024 to October 12, 2024, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.
Attorneys
Derek Don Posey
Michael D. Morehead — Oklahoma Indigent Defense System, Petitioner
State of Oklahoma
Christina Ann Burns — Oklahoma Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Jennifer L. Crabb — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent