No. 23-7615
Randall Crater v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: compulsory-process criminal-procedure fair-trial sixth-amendment structural-error touhy-regulations trial-subpoenas witness-testimony
Key Terms:
DueProcess SecondAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess SecondAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's decision to quash three trial subpoenas because defendant did not comply with Touhy regulations violated defendant's Sixth Amendment's Compulsory Process Right warranting a new trial?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the district court’s decision to quash three trial subpoenas because defendant did not comply with Touhy regulations violated defendant’s Sixth Amendment’s Compulsory Process Right warranting a new trial? i
Docket Entries
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-06-13
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-05-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 3, 2024)
Attorneys
Randall Crater
Scott P. Lopez — Lawson & Weitzen, LLP, Petitioner
Scott P. Lopez — Lawson & Weitzen, LLP, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent