No. 18-6044
IFP
Tags: appellate-review attorney-general due-process familial-conflict fifth-amendment fourteenth-amendment judicial-ethics recusal structural-error williams-v-pennsylvania
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment
DueProcess Punishment
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the right to due process require a finding of structural error where one member of the reviewing court is the son of the elected attorney general defending against the appeal?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Does the right to due process guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and upheld by the precedent of Williams v. Pennsylvania, 136 S.Ct 1899, 579 U.S. __ (2016), require a finding of structural error where one member of the reviewing court is the son of the elected attorney general defending against the appeal? ii
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-15
Brief of respondent Ohio in opposition filed.
2018-09-28
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 19, 2018.
2018-09-26
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 19, 2018 to November 19, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-09-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 19, 2018)
2018-08-03
Application (18A124) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until September 10, 2018.
2018-07-27
Application (18A124) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 6, 2018 to September 10, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Ohio
Richard James Beasley
Donald Michael Gallick — Donald Gallick, Esq., Petitioner
Donald Michael Gallick — Donald Gallick, Esq., Petitioner