No. 21-8000
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review constitutional-interpretation criminal-procedure general-verdict inconsistent-verdicts jury-trial reasonable-doubt sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a reviewing court may uphold a general verdict by relying on a specific fact the jury rejected as not proved beyond a reasonable doubt, in light of this Court's 'inconsistent verdicts' jurisprudence and the Sixth Amendment jury trial guarantee
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Question Presented How does this Court’s “inconsistent verdicts” jurisprudence reconcile with the Sixth Amendment jury trial guarantee: May a reviewing court uphold a general verdict by relying on a specific fact the jury rejected as not proved beyond a reasonable doubt?
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-10
Waiver of right of respondent State of California to respond filed.
2022-05-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 30, 2022)
Attorneys
Elijah Johnson
Stephen Michael Greenberg — Stephen Greenberg, Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Stephen Michael Greenberg — Stephen Greenberg, Attorney at Law, Petitioner
State of California