No. 22-6380
Joseph Bergeron v. Paul Schnell, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Corrections, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-duty administrative-law due-process equal-protection judicial-bias judicial-review legal-discretion rule-of-law separation-of-powers state-court-procedure statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2023-02-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can Minnesota State Courts ignore issues presented to it by a party, circumvent the rule of law to effectuate a clearly biased opinion?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1.) Can Minnesota State Courts ignore issues presented to it by a party, circumvent the rule of law to effectuate a clearly biased opinion? (a) The Commissioner had a nondiscretionary duty to specify a period of revocation and assign a release date. (Appellant Brief, Pg. 17-24, Reply, Pg. 23-25)
Docket Entries
2023-02-21
Petition DENIED.
2023-02-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-31
Waiver of right of respondent Paul Schnell, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Corrections, et al. to respond filed.
2022-12-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 23, 2023)
Attorneys
Paul Schnell, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Corrections, et al.
Kelly Susan Kemp — Minnesota Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Kelly Susan Kemp — Minnesota Attorney General's Office, Respondent