No. 20-8435

Vladimir Eugene v. Florida

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2021-06-28
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 6th-amendment confrontation-clause due-process equal-protection evidence fair-trial fourteenth-amendment hearsay ineffective-assistance non-hearsay-purpose
Key Terms:
CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether otherwise inadmissible nontestimonial hearsay admitted for non-hearsay purpose and thereafter used for their truth as substantive evidence violates the Confrontation Clause and right to a fair trial

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 7 I. WHETHER OTHERWISE INADMISSIBLE NONTESTIMONIAL HEARSAY, WHICH FALLS WITHIN NO STATUTORY HEARSAY EXCEPTION, ADMITTED FOR NON-HEARSAY PURPOSE AND THEREAFTER USED FOR THEIR TRUTH AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE VIOLATES THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE AND RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL? II. WHETHER THE STATE COURT VIOLATES EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION? II].WHETHER A COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO MOVE TO SUPPRESS AN ACCUSED’S POST-POLYGRAPH STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO WYRICK V. FIELDS, 459 U.S. 42 (1982) CONSTITUTES INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL UNDER STRICKLAND? iS 1

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-28
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2021-05-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 28, 2021)

Attorneys

Florida
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Vladimir Eugene
Vladimir Eugene — Petitioner
Vladimir Eugene — Petitioner