No. 20-6021
William Allen v. Candice Batts, et al.
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: alexander-v-louisiana constitutional-violation de-novo-review due-process fourteenth-amendment grand-jury-discrimination habeas-corpus jefferson-v-morgan systematic-exclusion
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Petitioner is entitled to habeas corpus relief
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED The questions presented are: 1, Whether Petitioner is entitled to habeas corpus relief where he was indicted by a grand jury from which African-Americans were systematically excluded in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, where that same grand jury has been found unconstitutional in Jefferson v. Morgan, 962 F.2d 1185 (6th Cir. 1992), 2. Whether Petitioner is entitled to de novo review of, and relief on, his grand jury discrimination claim because the state court judgment denying relief was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, Alexander v. Louisiana, 405 U.S. 625 (1972), and its predecessors. i
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-09
Brief of respondent Candice Batts in opposition filed.
2020-11-10
Response Requested. (Due December 10, 2020)
2020-10-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.
2020-10-22
Waiver of right of respondent Candice Batts to respond filed.
2020-09-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 16, 2020)
Attorneys
Candice Batts
John Henry Bledsoe III — Office of Tennessee Attorney General, Respondent
John Henry Bledsoe III — Office of Tennessee Attorney General, Respondent
William Allen
Sumter L. Camp — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Sumter L. Camp — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner