No. 18-6253
Daniel R. Wesling v. Pennsylvania
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: burden-of-proof criminal-conviction criminal-procedure due-process indictment indictment-sufficiency pennsylvania-law presumption-of-innocence prosecutorial-standards vagueness victim-testimony
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment
Latest Conference:
2018-11-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's conviction of the Petitioner with uncorroborated victim statements coupled with an indictment so vague as to destroy any possibility of an adequate defense, thereby creating an impermissibly large risk that the innocent will be convicted?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED | ; . 1). Is not the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania conviction of Petitioner with oe "_uncorroborated victim statements coupled with an indictment so vague to destroy any | possibility of an adequate defense giving Commonwealth of Pennsylvania a procedure , ~ which creates an impermissibly large risk that the innocent will be convicted?
Docket Entries
2018-11-19
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/16/2018.
2018-10-20
Waiver of right of respondent Pennsylvania to respond filed.
2018-05-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 8, 2018)
Attorneys
Pennsylvania
Michael Rakaczewski — Monroe County District Attorneys Office, Respondent
Michael Rakaczewski — Monroe County District Attorneys Office, Respondent