No. 18-9798
IFP
Tags: circuit-court-conflict criminal-propensity drew-v-united-states due-process evidence-admissibility evidence-of-other-crimes federal-circuits legal-precedent precedent prior-sexual-conduct sexual-assault undue-prejudice
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the DC Court of Appeals' decision directly conflicts with established legal precedent in federal circuits
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the DC Court of Appeals’ decision directly conflicts with established legal precedent in federal circuits, in particular Drew v. United States, 331 F.2d 85, 89 (D.C. Cir. 1964), where it held that evidence of other crimes, that is, prior sexual conduct exhibiting an “unusual sexual preference,” is admissible solely to prove the criminal propensity of a defendant on trial for sexual assault.
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-09-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-09-03
Reply of petitioner Craig Lee filed.
2019-08-26
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2019-07-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 26, 2019.
2019-07-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 25, 2019 to August 26, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-06-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 25, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent