No. 22-6121
Michael Paul Conn v. West Virginia
Response RequestedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: bouie-principle bouie-v-city-of-columbia due-process judicial-interpretation notice notice-requirement retroactive-application retroactivity sex-offender-registration west-virginia
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-03-31
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the retroactive application of a new interpretation of a state sex offender registration law violate due process?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Did it violate the Petitioner's due process right to notice pursuant to Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347, 84 S.Ct. 1697, 12 L.Ed.2d 894 (1964) when the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia announced a new interpretation of West Virginia's Sex Offender Registration Act expanding the category of convictions that require a lifetime registration, when that new interpretation was applied retroactively to the Petitioner to uphold his conviction for failure to register? i
Docket Entries
2023-04-03
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/31/2023.
2023-02-27
Brief of respondent West Virginia in opposition filed.
2023-01-10
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 27, 2023.
2023-01-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 6, 2023 to February 27, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-01-06
Response Requested. (Due February 6, 2023)
2023-01-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/20/2023.
2022-11-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 21, 2022)
Attorneys
Michael Conn
Jeremy Benjamin Cooper — Blackwater Law PLLC, Petitioner
Jeremy Benjamin Cooper — Blackwater Law PLLC, Petitioner
West Virginia
Lindsay Sara See — Office of the West Virginia Attorney General, Respondent
Lindsay Sara See — Office of the West Virginia Attorney General, Respondent