No. 22-966
Cavanta McLilly v. Adam Douglas, Warden
Response Waived
Tags: alleyne-violation criminal-procedure due-process evidence harmless-error jury-instructions jury-verdict police-testimony sentencing-review standard-of-review surveillance-video
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference:
2023-05-11
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether police testimony identifying Mr. McLilly as the perpetrator seen on a surveillance video from the crime scene had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether police testimony identifying Mr. McLilly as the perpetrator seen on a surveillance video from the crime scene had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict. II. Whether a trial court’s one-sentence statement that there is no need for resentencing because the court would not impose a materially different sentence fails to cure an Alleyne violation.
Docket Entries
2023-05-15
Petition DENIED.
2023-04-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/11/2023.
2023-04-12
Waiver of right of respondent Adam Douglas to respond filed.
2023-04-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 5, 2023)
Attorneys
Adam Douglas, Waiver
Ann Maurine Sherman — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent
Ann Maurine Sherman — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent