No. 20-1709
David Ming Pon v. United States
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure criminal-trial due-process evidence-standard government-case harmless-error judicial-review presumption-of-innocence standard-of-review
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2022-06-09
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether an appellate court reviewing a cold criminal trial record may determine that an error at trial was harmless by applying an 'overwhelming evidence of guilt' test that considers only the potential effect of the error on the government's case and not on the defense
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether an appellate court reviewing a cold criminal trial record may determine that an error at trial was harmless by applying an “overwhelming evidence of guilt” test that considers only the potential effect of the error on the government’s case and not on the defense.
Docket Entries
2022-06-13
Rehearing DENIED.
2022-05-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.
2021-12-10
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2021-11-15
Petition DENIED.
2021-10-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/12/2021.
2021-10-26
Reply of petitioner David Ming Pon filed. (Distributed)
2021-10-12
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2021-09-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 12, 2021.
2021-09-01
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 10, 2021 to October 11, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-07-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 10, 2021.
2021-07-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 11, 2021 to September 10, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-07-12
Brief amici curiae of Legal Scholars filed.
2021-07-12
Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute and Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
2021-07-09
Brief amicus curiae of Professor Daniel Epps filed.
2021-07-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 11, 2021.
2021-07-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 12, 2021 to August 11, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-05-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 12, 2021)
Attorneys
Cato Institute and Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
William McGinley Jay — Goodwin Procter, LLP, Amicus
William McGinley Jay — Goodwin Procter, LLP, Amicus
David Ming Pon
Steffen Nathanael Johnson — Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Petitioner
Steffen Nathanael Johnson — Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Petitioner
Legal Scholars
Linda T. Coberly — Winston & Strawn LLP, Amicus
Linda T. Coberly — Winston & Strawn LLP, Amicus
Professor Daniel Epps
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent