No. 23-6425
Christopher Daniel Taylor v. United States
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: brady-v-maryland brady-waiver criminal-procedure criminal-proceedings direct-appeal due-process fifth-amendment plea-agreement sentencing sentencing-phase
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2024-02-16
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
whether-the-fifth-amendment's-due-process-clause-permits-courts-to-find-a-plea-agreement-waiver-that-is-silent-as-to-brady-v-maryland-constitutes-a-knowing-and-intelligent-waiver-of-brady-claims-on-direct-appeal
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1 Whether the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause permits courts to find a plea agreement waiver that is silent as to Brady v. Maryland, 873 U.S. 83 (1963), constitutes a knowing and intelligent waiver of Brady : claims on direct appeal, thereby removing Brady’s due process protections \ from the sentencing phase of criminal proceedings. \ | | | i LIST OF
Docket Entries
2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-01-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-01-08
Motion (23M47) for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari under seal with redacted copies for the public record Granted.
2023-12-13
MOTION (23M47) DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-12-07
Motion (23M47) for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari under seal with redacted copies for the public record filed.
2023-12-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 7, 2024)
Attorneys
Christopher Daniel Taylor
Bradley D. Price — Dentons Davis Brown PC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent