No. 21-7003
Latique Johnson v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: admissibility admissibility-standard ballistics ballistics-testimony evidence expert-testimony expert-witness federal-rules-evidence federal-rules-of-evidence firearm forensic-science scientific-reliability
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
AdministrativeLaw Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2022-02-25
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether testimony by ballistics toolmark experts that a particular firearm fired recovered bullets or casings is presently so flawed as to be inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 702 in any circumstances
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether testimony by ballistics toolmark experts that a particular firearm fired recovered bullets or casings is presently so flawed as to be inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 702 in any circumstances. i
Docket Entries
2022-02-28
Petition DENIED.
2022-02-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/25/2022.
2022-02-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-01-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 28, 2022)
Attorneys
Latique Johnson
Andrew Levchuk — Andrew Levchuk, Counsellor at Law, LLC, Petitioner
Andrew Levchuk — Andrew Levchuk, Counsellor at Law, LLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent