No. 18-7416
Javier Solis v. Julie L. Jones, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
IFP
Tags: confrontation-clause crawford-precedent crawford-v-washington hearsay hearsay-exception jury-instructions jury-interpretation police-testimony sixth-amendment testimonial-evidence truth-of-the-matter-asserted
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether 'testimonial' or 'non-testimonial' should be the only factor in deciding whether Crawford's protection should apply
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED ° A POLICE OFFICER TESTIFIED TO MATTERS OF WHICH HE DID NOT HAVE DIRECT KNOWLEDGE INCLUDING A BOLO BULLETIN. Q. 1: SHOULD “TESTIMONIAL” OR “NON-TESTIMONIAL” BE THE ONLY FACTOR IN . DECIDING WHETHER CRAWFORDS PROTECTION SHOULD APPLY? Q. 2: WHETHER INFORMATION RELATED BY POLICE OFFICERS AT TRIALSHOULD . ESCAPE THE CONFRONTATION PROTECTION BECAUSE IT WAS ADMITTED “NOT FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER ASSERTED” WHEN IT IS REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT THIS WAS EXACTLY HOW JURY RECEIVED IT?
Docket Entries
2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2018-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 14, 2019)
2018-08-27
Application (18A206) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until October 15, 2018.
2018-08-13
Application (18A206) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 16, 2018 to October 15, 2018, submitted to Justice Thomas.