No. 24-6008

Michael P. Crenshaw v. Illinois

Lower Court: Illinois
Docketed: 2024-11-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-law due-process judicial-review jurisdiction statutory-provisions
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2024-12-13
Question Presented (from Petition)

However, the constitution establishes a rule and requires that a rule have retroactive application, then a state's Court refusal rescues the rule retroactive effect is reviewable by this Court?

The next question is whether Plaintiff may challenge his void order in this court. 04+ is a well-settled principle of law that a void order may be attacked at any time in any Court, either directly or collaterally.

The next question is: whether due process is implicated at a claim of innocence based upon newly discovered evidence, so as to permit the Claimant to have been assured of being tried by Plead guilty, when the statement given without Miranda. Without Miranda decision given Cleated are Forfeiture Confessions Legalities per old judgment - after entered Confess guilty, plea to be involuntary.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Question not identified.

Docket Entries

2024-12-16
Petition DENIED.
2024-11-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2024.
2024-11-25
Waiver of right of respondent Illinois to respond filed.
2024-11-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2024)

Attorneys

Illinois
Katherine Marie DoerschOffice of the Illinois Attorney General, Respondent
Michael P. Crenshaw
Michael P. Crenshaw — Petitioner