No. 20-8424

James Erik Godiksen v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2021-06-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure expert-testimony harmless-error judicial-discretion jury-instructions jury-note prejudice trial-procedure
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Court of Appeals improperly conclude that the District Court's mishandling of a jury note and replaying only a portion of the defense expert's testimony did not result in prejudice to the Defendant?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Did the Court of Appeals improperly conclude that the District Court’s mishandling of a jury note and replaying only a portion of the defense expert’s testimony did not result in prejudice to the Defendant? i

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-29
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
Main Document
2021-06-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 26, 2021)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionAppendixAppendixAppendixAppendixAppendixAppendix

Attorneys

James Godiksen
Tracy Hayes — Federal Defender’s Office for the District of Connecticut, Petitioner
United States of America
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent