No. 23-1224
Laila N. Hirjee v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-deference appellate-review deference evidentiary-standard inferences jury-verdict medical-decision prosecutorial-discretion standard-of-review weak-evidence weak-inference
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-06-13
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What level of deference from an appellate court is appropriate to a jury's verdict, when the verdict is based entirely on weak inferences to be drawn from the evidence?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED L What level of deference from an appellate court is appropriate to a jury’s verdict, when the verdict is based entirely on weak inferences to be drawn from the evidence? I. When, if ever, is it appropriate for federal prosecutors and FBI agents, with no medical training, to second guess the medical decisions made by physicians?
Docket Entries
2024-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2024.
2024-05-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-05-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 20, 2024)
Attorneys
Laila Hirjee
Gary Alan Udashen — Udashen Anton, Petitioner
Gary Alan Udashen — Udashen Anton, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent