No. 22-7397

Daniel Kim v. Massachusetts

Lower Court: Massachusetts
Docketed: 2023-04-28
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure criminal-speech due-process fighting-words first-amendment free-speech jury-determination jury-instructions speech-protection state-court true-threats
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2023-06-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a state court is prohibited from unilaterally determining whether a defendant's written speech on his blog is protected or criminal, without having to submit that issue/defense to the jury

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a state court is prohibited from unilaterally determining whether a defendant’s written speech on his blog is protected or criminal, without having to submit that issue/defense to the jury. 2. Whether a state court must instruct a jury on the federal definitions of fighting words and true threats as well all federal standards for determining whether speech is criminal or protected when a defendant raises the First Amendment as a defense. i

Docket Entries

2023-06-20
Petition DENIED.
2023-05-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/15/2023.
2023-05-24
Waiver of right of respondent Commonwealth of Massachusetts to respond filed.
2023-04-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 30, 2023)

Attorneys

Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Anna E. LumelskyMassachusetts Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Anna E. LumelskyMassachusetts Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Daniel Kim
Brad P. BennionLaw Office of Brad Bennion, Petitioner
Brad P. BennionLaw Office of Brad Bennion, Petitioner