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
Latest Conference:
2023-02-17
Question Presented (from Petition)
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)
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?
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
Joseph Bergeron
Joseph Bergeron — Petitioner
Paul Schnell, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Corrections, et al.
Kelly Susan Kemp — Minnesota Attorney General's Office, Respondent