No. 23-5459
Maurice Turner v. Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: co-defendant co-defendant-statements confrontation-clause criminal-procedure douglas-v-alabama due-process harmless-error pretrial-statements sixth-amendment testimony
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus Punishment Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus Punishment Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2023-10-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the violation of the Confrontation Clause as explicated in Douglas v. Alabama was harmless error
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED WHETHER THE VIOLATION OF THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE AS EXPLICATED IN DOUGLAS V. ALABAMA, 380 U.S. 415, 85 S.CT. 1074, 13 L.ED.2D 934 (1965) WAS HARMLESS ERROR WHEN THE TOTALITY OF THE EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT THE CONVICTION WAS BASED ON THE TESTIMONY OF DETECTIVE TIMOTHY THOMAS WHO REPEATED THE PRETRIAL STATEMENTS MADE TO HIM BY KARLA FREEMAN, THE NON-TESTIFYING CO-DEFENDANT? i pote
Docket Entries
2023-10-30
Petition DENIED.
2023-10-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2023.
2023-09-28
Waiver of right of respondent Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al. to respond filed.
2023-07-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 27, 2023)
Attorneys
Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al.
Scott Oershman — Mercer County Court House, Respondent
Scott Oershman — Mercer County Court House, Respondent
Maurice Turner
Cheryl J. Sturm — Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Cheryl J. Sturm — Attorney at Law, Petitioner