No. 18-9378
IFP
Tags: constitutional-interpretation constitutional-rights criminal-statute district-court due-process ex-post-facto ex-post-facto-doctrine fair-warning substantive-law
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus EmploymentDiscrimina
DueProcess HabeasCorpus EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference:
2019-06-13
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does a District Court's ex post facto construction of a substantive criminal statute deprive a petitioner of the fair warning to which the Constitution entitles him?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Does a District Court's ex post facto construction of a substantive criminal statute deprive a petitioner of the fair warning to which the Constitution entitles him? i
Docket Entries
2019-06-17
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2019-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-16
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.