No. 19-8678
Robert Michael Fall v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process exclusionary-rule fourth-amendment multiplicitous-counts reasonable-doubt search-and-seizure standing
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
FifthAmendment FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the District Court and Court of Appeals rely on inapplicable exceptions to the exclusionary rule, violating Mr. Fall's Fourth Amendment rights?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Did the District Court and Court of Appeals rely on inapplicable exceptions to the exclusionary rule, violating Mr. Fall’s Fourth Amendment rights? 2. Did the District Court and Court of Appeals improperly affirm multiplicitous counts, violating Mr. Fall’s Fifth Amendment rights? 3. Did the District Court and Court of Appeals violate Mr. Fall’s right to be found guilty only upon evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? 3
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-06-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-06-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 13, 2020)
Attorneys
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent