No. 18-6986
Nathan Lynn Cloud v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure exclusionary-rule fourth-amendment intergovernmental-agreements law-enforcement law-enforcement-agreements nevada-v-hicks service-of-process tribal-sovereignty
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-01-11
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the tribal criminal defendant have Fourth Amendment rights when state law enforcement violates an agreement with the tribe regarding criminal service of process on trust land?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Notwithstanding this Court’s holding in Nevada v. Hicks, where there is a law enforcement agreement between state authorities and the tribe regarding criminal service of process on trust land within the boundaries of the reservation, and where state law enforcement officers violated the agreement, does the tribal criminal defendant have rights under the Fourth Amendment? ii
Docket Entries
2019-01-14
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.
2018-12-20
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-12-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 10, 2019)
Attorneys
Nathan Cloud
Kimberly Ann Deater — Deater Law Office, Petitioner
Kimberly Ann Deater — Deater Law Office, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent