No. 21-5711
Irving Alexander Ramirez v. California
IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights courtroom-conduct courtroom-decorum due-process fair-trial jury-influence public-passion spectator-displays
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether spectator displays in a criminal jury trial should be prohibited as inherently prejudicial
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether as a rule, to keep the courtroom free from improper influences on the jury, spectator displays relevant to the case such as uniforms, buttons, and signs should be prohibited from a criminal jury trial as inherently prejudicial. What rule should apply to relevant spectator displays in determining whether a defendant’s constitutional rights to a fair trial and due process have been violated. ii STATEMENT OF
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-02
Reply of petitioner Irving Alexander Ramirez filed. (Distributed)
2021-11-18
Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.
2021-10-01
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 19, 2021.
2021-09-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 20, 2021 to November 19, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 20, 2021)
Attorneys
Irving Alexander Ramirez
State of California
Elizabeth Winsor Hereford — California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Alice Jane Bemis Lustre — Respondent