Oscar Oropeza v. Hector Rios, Warden, et al.
AdministrativeLaw Securities
Whether the state's compulsory process and due process rights were violated by denying petitioner's counsel the ability to effectively cross-examine witnesses
No question identified. : I . .„ . --1 -j_ 2 _ _ __ ... ... . —___ !-: Z &/&T3j <>7>1T^7^S &sutf7j:7£/&aw9£ 7# Ska\ 777Z" 7'7f& gtf /7-'?& :7 i j2, Z/ ’/z? J/5?7?r ^A TPPg'M ’c# Vfz>&*7& X ?! oc7/C7/7(7^r) S'^TrnZS /Z> y? zy^^Z^y 77Zsj?c ,; 3,z2/z2 .Sf'Td'T'^ £>/' sP7<7A7C& ZWz?Z2 r TXZT s^sTz^t? <y A<%4A 7o /# '■Z'/S/'Z Sts^'2 /w/tesZ-T'Ssrc TsZJrfZ ? &y s?^' /^r^?zxz>ia^z ZZC>tz<£>^r>zf/ir e/t TdTr^ .7^54X4^) Z^3»^ •yT'r?' S77?T& AS^ZtS 7Z%£'j&C& \Z?j£srfZ'' /te7s7>&&jg'7Z ,S ss i> To &/r TZftf j &y 77^ /Ptor/ats /Z'g&t. /4 y*/£i<J 77Z/WZ5. J0&&S ■ZT'TfZ' m//?c {X^/AS&fZ \//6>Zsr7Z' 'jf Z?^T7> :7%^/x/Z ^7^7^ " “73 tXsz&^c^S' 75s? »> z . Zbzx^*^SJ" //^ tPPs jXXns&z. t, si'fJT' S7^~^ U)/7>^ ^XT ■ s fe. £z<?ZS JTWg' 77^^ g&astJSerZ sz ’ j £>y jy>y>£4&*s# s&rezyZevrt. XXd 7^^ Tt/tgZiJ I ! /foes C&Mesee V/cLer'7 far/frtwezfo dw-ts7/7~F ts/foMA'r/, Fite? ifF> dfoftse' Ffoc&gss ’ se’s /fou&z. s&L*& F> ee^e" /FrF F^seFep&FF 0p /^x. /rfs f /foi^e^4 CFess S. /e/^ Ffye Fc^eF C.F/S. /&SF 7F~ /fo£7 &/''F&C-s/Fr /fo) ; /tse7 s^e<2te>ej7 /& FggFFy /F& Fk^xs £?e//-'^F ? ' d/Sf' P/&&7&S IXJ /fei Z’/i/zT'/gS <0& sutef /Sts d/$&//$/'-/ T'##' d/tS#' &*/ //*&?.■ /f faefteS . 72 7/f?e w T&g' £&*^r , /s 7&?s /s /fr t /. $/S7&/t-7' fM/rf /?"& #/$/&' /?/// /k?? ^4^/ "2. 7fy7/Zrf &//r/&2s/7' r&rt. /fas/? ^/sts'/y &// ^t/£S 'f ^/c/t//& z^z//^ Asidesj /uC/0?^ Z z / /ft "C/2 Cfo.s&f. i^jzoz-iy 2,, frerrus er fl^/0&isr>vr£ see' M&r of /tey&z^Ms ,33 /f/ /j #$-*&# az.e. 3, Z rz^, 3ZZ ^t/ f J&7 rtfy /MZ> C7Z>*/ /5Z?S STUTZ' \/ #£. ^SSjt&O f&f /Sfefelt^P) 5> fZZrt </ 0/./M. /. /ffy ef ') /3<? rM.*?. 'f&rtJ ff7> } /3? M. ‘yrt /ff>"CC/7 Mfi/Z fOZO.) /?, /. S/irterjTcZ'T ’j /-T'r^ss. 3^7)^ .377 fe/ (e t3 Cfl/TsO. f. u /Za<?^Z ^e//. ^33, $7/ feS 7^3 8. ffe/ ’lt; V. 5 35f /?7fr/. 3eo (/ff 3?) V. Y88 ffer/. <?¥£ C$1 ‘£&rtf 77rej7f V CM M M/pr Tte/rt) //. &K7& IZ ^r^¥ z &Z f3M A//fHSc 3^/ff '/?? I I /Z. fy^r^rte'C i/. j f‘3f ff; f/f C& S3, V. £O™&, fZ/f MS. 5M/, % SMf 33 f /#/U7?2} \/¥. Starts' iz; &*c***s frtrf'Mwcf 3% f /S'. SP&T'M f. &>/&■ '■M00&9 -£&■/ J ffc7, 3&3 P3^ i 25?" ib?t U . 3ZM& ' -fS>8 /. $ S&k P. 3cJ ils] /^ CPS. f f^r^C^&M. I^p4) i P/6^ iZ Lbtfir&P } 143&) ,2&. </. //¥&(&. /??') 'Z'L vi $-/^tf, 3&? su; //v, /rf'JSM *-2^ ■st. V. 7^^s2>^ i 3& ///. s&S ’. /2>/} S??sV-ts;& w/, 2, ! Q^AXS7/7a77^(-&77 sfrux? ST^TZ/TT*,/?/' /sJ>/<&Vt£& "TFxXiP&X 77 \4/?s&ts0/x r 4tea<&ws sT'&ttz aF Fe/e, 7772' &/z&/cf'7', /f/7?<E7G7/7/x: S 72&C.7S/0XS gF F/x"77 t7 STUTZ' /7/.s7s?k7 TVK' 7?/Sf^ 77 777^ 77<T77C c) 0/fy/LSS77SS y&ts& . C\ fa&l&ats 7M£ 57<r ^7 '777/^0 Jta7C/rfC TPsjz&tT’ &K i/z7. ^0^777$/ jf D 77)7/6(7 <r)7 7$€& 7/ci7iS /&& 77&?77&£ >/&S*f 7 ^7577^7^7 71/)(.^7 £>F TFT'&j 7^77X77 o. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment below. OPINIONS BELOW (Vj For cases from federal courts: The opinion of the United States court of appeals appears at