No. 20-456

Michael Elder v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2020-10-08
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: 4th-amendment civil-procedure exclusionary-rule fourth-amendment judicial-procedure official-misconduct party-presentation search-and-seizure supervisee-rights supervisee-search suspicionless-search
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-01-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Second Circuit violated the party presentation principle

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Second Circuit violated the party presentation principle articulated in United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 140 S. Ct. 1575 (2020) when, in affirming the district court’s decision denying a motion to suppress, it held that the exclusionary rule is inapplicable, even though the government waived the argument and neither party briefed or raised the issue at any stage. 2. Whether this Court’s exclusionary rule jurisprudence requires evidence to be suppressed when it is found during a suspicionless search of a federal supervisee’s home, and the officer conducting the search knew that at least reasonable suspicion was required but deliberately disregarded that requirement and conducted the search anyway.

Docket Entries

2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-22
Reply of petitioner Michael Elder filed. (Distributed)
2020-12-09
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2020-11-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 9, 2020.
2020-11-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 9, 2020 to December 9, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-10-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 9, 2020)

Attorneys

Michael Elder
Dwayne Dason SamWomble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Petitioner
Dwayne Dason SamWomble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent