No. 20-5099
Lantrel DeKeith Wilson v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 4th-amendment 6th-circuit consent-search consent-to-search criminal-procedure inevitable-discovery motion-to-suppress search-and-seizure sixth-circuit supreme-court-precedent terry-stop
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy Jurisdiction
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy Jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals conflicts with Terry-v-Ohio
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED L Whether the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in affirming the District Court’s denial of Lantrel Wilson’s Motion to Suppress conflicts with this Court’s long-standing precedent in Terry v. Ohio? IL. Whether the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misapplied this Court’s precedent on consent to search? I. Whether the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misapplied this Court’s precedent on Inevitable Discovery? i
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-07-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 17, 2020)
Attorneys
Lantrel Wilson
Mark Edwin Brown — Menefee & Brown, P.C., Petitioner
United States of America
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent