No. 18-7206
Christopher Thomas Kegler v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 4th-amendment 5th-amendment constitutional-interpretation criminal-procedure due-process evidence legal-precedent miranda-rights search-and-seizure self-incrimination supreme-court-review
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should this Court reconsider and reverse Schneckloth v. Bustamente
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Should this Court reconsider and reverse Schneckloth v. Bustamente, 412 U.S. 218, 222 (1973) on the ground that that it is inconsistent with the reasoning of Miranda vy. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), Dickerson v. United States, 120 S.Ct. 2326, 2334, 530 U.S. 428, 440 (2000), and the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Johnson, 346 A.2d 66, 68, 68 N.J. 349, 354 (N.J. 1975)? i
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2018-12-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 1, 2019)
Attorneys
Christopher Kegler
Douglas J Beevers — Office of the Federal Defender, Petitioner
Douglas J Beevers — Office of the Federal Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent