No. 22-7624

Gregory P. Smith v. Oklahoma

Lower Court: Oklahoma
Docketed: 2023-05-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: 14th-amendment constitutional-violation due-process fourteenth-amendment judge judicial-ethics judicial-misconduct penal-statute prosecuting-attorney sexual-relationship substantive-due-process
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

When was Mr. Smith's substantive due process right(s) or XIV Amendment violated?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(s) PRESENTED , 1, Mr. Smith respectfully asks: ! When “former” Oklahoma County District Judge Timothy Henderson entered in a sexual relationship with the prosecuting attorney, was Mr. Smith’s substantive due process right(s) or XIV Amendment violated or a Ninth Amendment issue or other unknown constitutional violation? 2. Mr. Smith respectfully asks: Oklahoma Penal Statute, 21 O.S. § 843.5 is described as chameleonic because it Jacks definition(s) and/or element(s) to the offense. Is this penal statute in conformity with the United States Constitution, Amendment(s), IX and/or XIV? [facially and/or as it is applied 1 ORLAHOMA GOVERNOR KEVIN STITT IS QUOTED ON PAGE 8 — “...any potential malfeasance and the effect on cases over which HENDERSON presided.” i

Docket Entries

2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-07-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-04-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 23, 2023)

Attorneys

Gregory P. Smith
Gregory P. Smith — Petitioner
Gregory P. Smith — Petitioner