No. 21-6012

Michael Rimmer v. Tennessee

Lower Court: Tennessee
Docketed: 2021-10-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: capital-trial confrontation-clause criminal-procedure double-jeopardy due-process fundamental-fairness prosecutorial-misconduct trial-fairness witness-unavailability
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus Punishment
Latest Conference: 2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

whether-the-courts-below-erred-by-upholding-the-trial-court's-determination-that-the-only-witness-to-petitioner's-purported-jailhouse-confession-was-unavailable

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the courts below erred by upholding the trial court’s determination that the only witness to petitioner’s purported jailhouse confession was “unavailable,” allowing the prosecution, at petitioner’s retrial, to read to the jury testimony of such witness. 2. Whether due process tolerates a trial containing serious violations of fundamental fairness regarding material physical evidence, when viewed in combination with the remaining evidence (or lack thereof). 3. Whether the purposeful prosecutorial misconduct at petitioner’s first trial and resentencing was of such a magnitude to implicate the Double Jeopardy Clause. i

Docket Entries

2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-02
Reply of petitioner Michael Rimmer filed. (Distributed)
2021-11-18
Brief of respondent Tennessee in opposition filed.
2021-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 19, 2021)

Attorneys

Michael Rimmer
Deborah Yvonne DrewTennessee Office of the Post Conviction Defender, Petitioner
State of Tennessee
Andrew Craig CoulamState of Tennessee Attorney General's Office, Respondent