No. 18-8918

David Wiley v. Jennifer Wiley

Lower Court: Washington
Docketed: 2019-04-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: best-interests-of-child bills-of-attainder child-support due-process judicial-discretion parent-child-relationship
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess FirstAmendment Jurisdiction
Latest Conference: 2019-06-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Question not identified

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED. RULE 14 1 (A) I have listed 5 questions hereunder that fall under 3 criteria listed as (i) through (iii). The criteria are some of the clauses listed in Rule 10 of your court that you consider when making decisions whether to grant or deny Certiorari applications. Questions 1 falls under criteria (i) and (iii); question 2 falls under criteria (i) and (ii); and question 3 falls under criteria (ii) and . (iii). Criteria i). Rule 10 (c) a state court [having] decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court; ii). Rule 10 (b) a state court of last resort having decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of [several] United . States courts of appeal, the United States Supreme Court and actually its own prior rulings as well; : ; . . iii). Rule 10 (a) state court of last resort. has so far departed from the . accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, [and has] sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of this Court's supervisory power; i . Questions Presented 1. Is the Fundamental Right to the Parent-Child relationship at stake : during the dissolution process? | 2. Do State Court Judges have the legal discretion to make prejudicial determinations as to the best interests of a child? 3. Does the levying of Child Support to apply to all non-custodial Parents violate the U.S. Constitutional prohibition on Bills of Attainder? Additional Questions Presented for Consideration: 4. Does a trial court judge have the authority to admit evidence not authorization by law and over an objection of a litigant? : 5. Does Due Process require that our lower courts make findings of fact regarding testimony of a petitioner-witness who admits having _ a knowingly made false statements under oath? ii

Docket Entries

2019-06-24
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
2019-02-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 20, 2019)

Attorneys

David Wiley
David Wiley — Petitioner