No. 19-5806
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: confidential-informant confrontation-clause criminal-procedure drug-transaction due-process evidence evidence-admission sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
Privacy
Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's erroneous admission of a video of an alleged drug-and-firearm transaction between the CI and the defendant violated the confrontation-clause
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT’S ERRONEOUS ADMISSION OF A VIDEO OF AN ALLEGED DRUG : AND FIREARM TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE CI | AND THE DEFENDANT VIOLATED THE ! CONFRONTATION CLAUSE OF THE SIXTH | AMENDMENT? 1 ; INTERESTED PARTIES There are no
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-02
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-10-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 2, 2019.
2019-10-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 31, 2019 to December 2, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-01
Response Requested. (Due October 31, 2019)
2019-09-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.
2019-09-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-08-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 4, 2019)
Attorneys
John Bradham
Robin Farnsworth — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Robin Farnsworth — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent