No. 18-9347
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 14th-amendment constitutional-law constitutional-violation conviction criminal-procedure due-process evidence fourteenth-amendment judicial-procedure jury limine limine-orders prejudicial-testimony violation
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was Mc. Sims denied due process of law when the District Court and Kansas Supreme Court upheld a conviction obtained by the State's violation of Three separate Limine orders, which introduced highly prejudicial testimony to go before the jury, in violation of the XIV Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Was Mc. Sims denied due process of law when the District Court and Kansas Supreme Court upheld a conviction obtained by the State's violation of Three separate Limine orders, which introduced highly prejudicial testimony to go before the jury, in violation of the XIV Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? \
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-06
Waiver of right of respondent Kansas to respond filed.
2019-04-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 19, 2019)
2019-02-17
Application (18A874) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 28, 2020 to April 28, 2020, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
Attorneys
Kansas
Toby Crouse — Office of Attorney General Derek Schmidt, Respondent
Toby Crouse — Office of Attorney General Derek Schmidt, Respondent