No. 24-5961
James A. Bell v. Michele Dauzat, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 14th-amendment constitutional-violation due-process prosecutorial-misconduct trial-fairness witness-vouching
Latest Conference:
2025-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. WHETHER A PROSECUTOR'S "BOLSTERING" OF A WITNESS TO U.S. v. YOUNG'S WHERE THE "BOLSTERING" ATTESTING TO THE TESTIMONY IS A PERMISSIBLE EXCEPTION PROHIBITION AGAINST VOUCHING, CONSISTS OF THE PROSECUTOR PERSONALLY TRUTHFULNESS OF WITNESS TESTIMONY.
2. WHETHER THE COMMENTS OF THE PROSECUTOR INFECTED THE TRIAL WITH UNFAIRNESS THAT CONVICTION VIOLATES THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE 14th AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.IN THIS CASE SO THE RESULTING
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a prosecutor's 'bolstering' of a witness's testimony constitutes an impermissible vouching exception and violates due process under the 14th Amendment
Docket Entries
2025-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-12-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-12-06
Waiver of right of respondent Michele Dauzat, Warden to respond filed.
2024-10-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 16, 2024)
Attorneys
James A. Bell
James A. Bell — Petitioner
Michele Dauzat, Warden
Tracy W. Houck — Third Judicial District Attorney's Office, Respondent