No. 18-6606

Anthony James Merrick v. Charles L. Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-11-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights due-process establishment-clause free-speech religious-freedom standing
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2018-12-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the lack of a workable test for determination of religious sincerity create arbitrary decisions based on bias that effectively violate the Establishment Clause?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Me, Merrick alleged tat he had a Fight to practice his sincerely hela ; personal religious veltefs , especially Linen Wumetes of other weliquous . Satins Were alveady alowed these prackies oy prison ofcdls, usithodt having to belong te a cnurch wth a veligidus leader Who Would conkiren wembersh ip , loelieks and gractiies . Prisan offictals cefusedd to awe. : Merrick the cpgortunity . The United Stefes Didiniek court later _ | held om “defendant's mation fr Semmary Dudgement tak Meorck . was wsmcere fur met haveng a chore or WS leadership cowe Krwsatd | . ‘te verity nis claus, They alse fund Merck, failed to case any : genome disputes regarding veligtous sincerty pegued pratection,, ancl | ( eatalaidhmenat of religion vequrless of fre ofhclauls and evidence he | Suovutled te dispute defeadauls claius. “The United States Court GF Appects fev the Wusih Curcult disregarded precedent of 4hcs | . Coors and concuicrent woets Ane distrect courts . Ws case Thos. 4 Presents We Folousing gestions oO . . | J. Does he lack of a workalole test for deleemuoten : ; of religious Sunceenty <reote arbtiory decisens based on ras, . | . thot effectwely Violate ne Esteblishment clause . | 2. The Court's Missagplicatwn of Mason Vv. New Yorker | Magezme Ne, 5Ol OS. 49S (aa); ana Andersen v. Liberty Lelloy., | . UIT OS, 242 Cae) holdings met court's ave notte decide ortocen disprted Lacts or assess crediloilicty on <a wction foe Sommavy Budqmamnt | ; Warrants tris Court's otention | | | 3. Did the: Court err mn Funding dna Meriicks did wot ; raise. & genuine csoute a matewical Fact wsdtiy ves pect to Meweck ~ heving, 4ne opportuncty +o prachce Vis Fatt When he demonstrated otner wuinkes Were allaved ts practice fre exact Same geacktees ; Wile Ne. sees dened re oop hun hey , ; A. Did the Court eve w finding Merrick did Wot rae a : ‘ . Qenume dispute GF wee ric Fests ushen the Annee pronged tes4 . | . As court. se forth iw Leen vu. Kurtaman, 463 Gis. 602.4219 Gsas nee | . followed by tne couck. | . BL Did Ae court's misapplication of Matushita Electnceel . Tadustnal Co. Ltd. vi Zendn Radic Gorge, 41S US. 57H Case) steandawds : tincdk Ahe courl's mos¥ views all Recs aud yeasmeble whence s . 7 in Savor of Mere, UWoarcant Wis curls atlentin . : | 6, Does Mhe government have autherchy Aes awtortrarly | and capmiwasly determine an adherents rel gous sincendy | | basedk on Anew Bias’ and tmereon deny reliiwus fecha, | i i ; : |

Docket Entries

2018-12-10
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.
2018-11-09
Waiver of right of respondent Charles L. Ryan, et al. to respond filed.
2018-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2018)

Attorneys

Anthony J. Merrick
Anthony James Merrick — Petitioner
Anthony James Merrick — Petitioner
Charles L. Ryan, et al.
Daniel Patrick SchaackArizona Atty. General, Respondent
Daniel Patrick SchaackArizona Atty. General, Respondent