No. 23-7633

Deanne R. Upson Giese v. William Earl Wallace, III

Lower Court: Maryland
Docketed: 2024-06-04
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: child-custody civil-rights constitutional-protections due-process equal-protection equal-rights-amendment free-speech interstate-jurisdiction interstate-relations parent-child parental-rights
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Have the states of Maryland, District of Columbia, and Virginia violated the rights of this Mother and Child under the United States Constitution?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Question 1: Given that the Equal Rights Amendment is now Ratified, have the states of Maryland, District of Columbia, and Virginia violated the rights of this Mother and Child under the United States Constitution? Question 2: Did the Maryland Supreme Court err in ruling that this case (and related 20 case history) has “no public interest”? : , Questions incorporated by reference from the Petitioner’s first case at the US Supreme Court: 1) Does it violate United States Constitutional Rights between parents and children (and vice versa), due process, equal protection, and free speech for the states courts to allow a complete severing of ties between this fit parent and her child for over 4 years — or any length of time — pendente lite or in final ruling that is too long to maintain contact and a continuing meaningful relationship, to protect the best interests of the : child, and ensure due process? 2) Does it violate the United States Constitution for the District of Columbia (DC) courts to informally allow matters relating to child custody and domestic violence to be heard in other state courts despite that child support and child custody jurisdiction properly attached in DC and no formal leave of court has been ordered to move matters to other states? 3) Does the US Supreme Court have a duty to impress the US Constitutional protections over interstate relations and civil rights to enforce the US Constitution in child support, child custody, and domestic violence cases to prevent interstate discrimination and litigant forum shopping between the states?

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-01
Waiver of right of respondent William E. Wallace III to respond filed.
2024-02-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 5, 2024)
2023-12-20
Application (23A568) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until February 19, 2024.
2023-12-11
Application (23A568) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 21, 2023 to February 19, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

Deanne R. Upson Giese
Deanne R. Upson GieseHoffee Law Firm, Petitioner
Deanne R. Upson GieseHoffee Law Firm, Petitioner
William E. Wallace III
William E. Wallace IIICapitol Legal Group, Respondent
William E. Wallace IIICapitol Legal Group, Respondent