No. 19-7012
Robert Eugene Hardesty v. Willis Chapman, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: due-process due-process-fair-trial,evidence,michigan-rule-of-e due-process,insufficient-evidence,5th-amendment,6t effective-assistance-of-counsel,fair-trial,6th-ame fair-trial insufficient-evidence michigan-constitution-1963-article-1-section-17 michigan-rule-of-evidence-404(b) us-constitution-amendments-v-xiv
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-02-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is the admittance of irrelevant and prejudicial bad acts evidence under the guise of Michigan Rule of Evidence 404(b) a violation of due process and a fair trial pursuant to the U.S. Const. Ams. V, XIV; Mich. Const. 1963, Art. 1, §17?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. : |
Docket Entries
2020-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2020-01-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-13
Waiver of right of respondent Willis Chapman, Warden to respond filed.
2019-12-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 21, 2020)
Attorneys
Robert Eugene Hardesty
Robert Eugene Hardesty — Petitioner
Willis Chapman, Warden
Fadwa A. Hammoud — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent