No. 20-7824

Amin Ricker v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-04-22
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process expert-testimony notice rebuttal trial
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2021-05-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does Due Process require an expert's findings and conclusions be provided to Defendant with sufficient notice before trial to effectively rebut the opinions?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Does Due Process require an expert’s findings and conclusions be provided to Defendant with sufficient notice before trial to effectively rebut the opinions? 2) What level of scrutiny should be applied when excluding a family member of a Defendant from a criminal trial in light of a criminal defendant’s rights to a public trial as enumerated in Jn re Oliver? 3) Under the holding of Alleyne v. United States, does the prior conviction exception found in Almendarez-Torres v. United States apply to an increase of a mandatory minimum sentence, and if so, should Almendarez-Torres v. United States be overturned? i

Docket Entries

2021-05-24
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/20/2021.
2021-05-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2021-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 24, 2021)

Attorneys

Amin Ricker
Justin Lee BellMay, Adam, Gerdes & Thompson, LLP, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent