No. 20-5123
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: appeal-pipeline criminal-procedure due-process equal-protection fourteenth-amendment non-unanimous-verdict pipeline ramos-relief ramos-v-louisiana retroactivity sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Cardell Hayes is entitled to the relief provided by Ramos v. Louisiana because his case is in the appeal pipeline
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Because Cardell Hayes’s non-unanimous verdict is unconstitutional, Ramos v. Louisiana, — 8.Ct. —, 2020 WL 1906545 (2020), is he entitled to the relief provided by Ramos because his case is in the appeal pipeline?
Docket Entries
2021-02-12
MANDATE ISSUED.
2021-02-12
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-01-11
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Ramos</i> v. <i>Louisiana</i>, 590 U. S. ___ (2020).
2020-12-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-11-16
Brief of respondent State of Louisiana in opposition filed.
2020-10-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 16, 2020.
2020-10-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 16, 2020 to November 16, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-09-16
Response Requested. (Due October 16, 2020)
2020-08-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-08-18
Waiver of right of respondent State of Louisiana to respond filed.
2020-05-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 20, 2020)
Attorneys
State of Louisiana
Elizabeth Baker Murrill — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Elizabeth Baker Murrill — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent