No. 20-7981
Stephen Nivens v. J. Phillip Morgan, Warden, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: charging-document constitutional-rights double-jeopardy duplicitous duplicitous-charging fifth-amendment jury jury-trial multiplicitous multiplicitous-charging
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment Privacy
FifthAmendment Privacy
Latest Conference:
2021-06-03
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Petitioner has a right to be free from Double Jeopardy
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the Petitioner has a right to be free from Double Jeopardy, after the jury was sworn in and with the jury ruling upon Count 5 and Count 6 pursuant to the sameness analysis and charging document, which were both duplicitous and multiplicitous, pursuant to the Fifth Amendment?
Docket Entries
2021-06-07
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/3/2021.
2021-05-14
Waiver of right of respondent J. Phillip Morgan, et al. to respond filed.
2021-04-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 10, 2021)
Attorneys
J. Phillip Morgan, et al.
Daniel John Jawor — Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Respondent
Stephen Nivens
Stephen Nivens — Petitioner