No. 22-5055
Amin Wadley, aka Jamil Abdul Amin White v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure criminal-trial-procedure evidence-rules evidentiary-standards federal-rules-of-evidence law-enforcement law-enforcement-testimony lay-witness lay-witness-testimony opinion-evidence opinion-testimony
Key Terms:
Privacy
Privacy
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court should set limits on what law enforcement testimony should be admitted as opinion evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 701
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether this Court should set limits on what law enforcement testimony should be admitted as opinion evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 701.
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-07-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-07-19
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-07-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 8, 2022)
Attorneys
Amin Wadley
Alison Brill — Office of the Federal Public Defender, D.N.J., Petitioner
Alison Brill — Office of the Federal Public Defender, D.N.J., Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent