No. 23-6789

Randolph Maya v. Florida

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2024-02-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: evidence grand-jury grand-jury-testimony impeachment impeachment-evidence jury-instructions prior-inconsistent-statement substantive-evidence witness witness-testimony
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2024-03-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can a party knowingly call a witness it expects to testify contrary to previous statements in order for those statements to entered as substantive evidence before a jury?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Can a party knowingly call a witness it expects to testify contrary to previous statements in order for those statements to entered as substantive evidence before a jury? 2. Is giving the standard 2.13 Prior Inconsistent Statement as Impeachment instructions confusing, contradictory or misleading when prior grand jury testimony was used for impeachment and is also entered as substantive evidence? 2

Docket Entries

2024-04-01
Petition DENIED.
2024-03-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2024.
2024-03-06
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2024-01-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 21, 2024)

Attorneys

Florida
Marilyn Frances MuirOffice of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent
Marilyn Frances MuirOffice of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent
Randolph Maya
Randolph Maya — Petitioner
Randolph Maya — Petitioner