No. 25-5366

Jane Doe v. Jack Dwosh

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2025-08-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: due-process eighth-amendment excessive-fines fourteenth-amendment indigent-party pro-per
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment
Latest Conference: 2025-10-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause protect a pro per indigent party in State courts, whether or not she uses the term 'Eighth Amendment' in her opposition in describing her indigence and the excessiveness of fines?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

The Eighth Amendment ’s Excessive Fines Clause, which protects against excessive punitive economic sanctions, is fundamental to the scheme of ordered liberty, with deep roots in the Nation ’s history and tradition, and thus the Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the States under the Fourteenth Amendment Amendment ’s Due Process Clause. U.S. Const. Amends. 8, 14. Does the Eighth Amendment ’s Excessive Fines Clause protect a pro per indigent party in State courts, whether or not she uses the term “Eighth Amendment ” in her opposition in describing her indigence and the excessiveness of fines?

Docket Entries

2025-10-20
Petition DENIED.
2025-10-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/17/2025.
2025-08-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 15, 2025)

Attorneys

Jane Doe
Jane Doe — Petitioner
Jane Doe — Petitioner