No. 19-696

Dan Haendel v. Anne Reed, et al.

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-12-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: alford-plea due-process fair-trial fourteenth-amendment heck-v-humphrey interception-act law-enforcement suppression-motion virginia virginia-interception-act
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2020-01-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does Heck v. Humphrey bar Appellant's federal court review of the constitutionality of actions by local Virginia investigative and law enforcement officials in violation of the plain language of the Virginia Interception Act pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment's due process guarantee?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , 1. Does Heck v. Humphrey bar Appellant’s federal court review of the constitutionality of actions by local Virginia investigative and law enforcement officials in violation of the plain language of the Virginia Interception Act pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process guarantee? 2. Isan Alford plea equivalent to a guilty plea for purposes of providing an exception to Heck v. Humphrey bar as provided by cases in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit? 8. Is a guilty or Alford plea not an intelligent, knowing and voluntary plea in violation of defendant’s constitutional right to a fair trial where a defendant has no access to legal resources and/or his attorneys’ failure to inform him of a Virginia statue’s pre-trial suppression motion for disclosure and/or use of evidence obtained by an interception of electronic communications, even if the interception itself is not illegal, the plain language of the statute provides that disclosure and/or use of such interception by law enforcement officials constitutes a felony?

Docket Entries

2020-01-27
Petition DENIED.
2020-01-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2020.
2019-12-10
Waiver of right of respondents BB Cully and Jim Williams to respond filed.
2019-12-04
Waiver of right of respondent Anne Reed to respond filed.
2019-08-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 2, 2020)

Attorneys

Anne Reed
John Chadwick JohnsonFrith Anderson & Peake, P.C., Respondent
John Chadwick JohnsonFrith Anderson & Peake, P.C., Respondent
BB Cully and Jim Williams
Richard Hustis MilnorZunka, Milnor & Carter, Ltd., Respondent
Richard Hustis MilnorZunka, Milnor & Carter, Ltd., Respondent
Dan Haendel
Dan Haendel — Petitioner
Dan Haendel — Petitioner