No. 25-90
Mark S. Scott v. United States, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-review constitutional-due-process government-misconduct judicial-review legal-standard perjured-testimony
Latest Conference:
2025-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit applied the wrong standard to the admission of perjured testimony that the government knew to be perjured, when it applied a "reasonable likelihood" standard instead of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard required by this Court in Glossip v. Oklahoma, 145 S. Ct. 612 (2025).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit applied the wrong standard to the admission of perjured testimony that the government knew to be perjured
Docket Entries
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-08-22
Waiver of right of respondent Karl Sebastian Greenwood to respond filed.
2025-08-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-07-30
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-07-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-07-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 22, 2025)
Attorneys
Karl Sebastian Greenwood
Justin Seth Weddle — Weddle Law PLLC, Respondent
Mark S. Scott
Roger Lee Stavis — Mintz and Gold LLP, Petitioner
United States
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent