No. 20-5875
Terrence D. Marsh v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-924c 6th-amendment criminal-procedure defense-right evidence firearm-prosecution firearms rosemond-precedent rosemond-v-united-states section-924c sixth-amendment statements-against-interest
Key Terms:
Privacy
Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-11-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Court violated Rosemond v. United States, 572 U.S. 65 (2014), when finding Marsh had advance knowledge of the presence of a firearm in his 18 U.S.C. §924(c) prosecution?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Court violated Rosemond v. United States, 572 U.S. 65 (2014), when finding Marsh had advance knowledge of the presence of a firearm in his 18 U.S.C. §924(c) prosecution? Whether the Court undercut Marsh’s Sixth Amendment right to present a defense at trial by refusing to admit Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 804(b)(3) statements against penal interest? 1
Docket Entries
2020-11-23
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.
2020-11-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-09-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 2, 2020)
Attorneys
Terrence Marsh
Brian J. Kornbrath — Federal Public Defender Office, Petitioner
Brian J. Kornbrath — Federal Public Defender Office, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent