No. 25-5869
Lance Shockley v. Richard Adams, Warden, et al.
IFP
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess FirstAmendment
SocialSecurity DueProcess FirstAmendment
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the State of Missouri's decision to deny a condemned his choice of spiritual advisor solely on the basis of the individual's familial relationship violate this Court's holding in Ramirez v. Collier and impose a substantial burden on the inmate's free exercise of religion?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
1. Does the State of Missouri’s decision to deny a condemned his choice of spiritual advisor solely on the basis of the indivi dual’s familial relationship violate this Court’s holding in Ramirez v. Collier and impose a substantial burden on the inmate’s free exercise of religion.
Docket Entries
2025-10-14
Brief of respondent Richard Adams, et al. in opposition and motion to file a supplemental appendix under seal filed.
2025-10-14
Reply of Lance Shockley submitted.
2025-10-14
Application (25A418) referred to the Court.
2025-10-14
Petition DENIED.
2025-10-14
Application (25A418) for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is denied. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. Respondents' motion for leave to file a supplemental appendix under seal is granted.
2025-10-14
Reply of petitioner Lance Shockley filed.
2025-10-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.
2025-10-13
Application (25A418) for a stay of execution of sentence of death, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
Attorneys
Lance Shockley
Jeremy Sean Weis — Federal Public Defender - MOW, Petitioner
Jeremy Sean Weis — Federal Public Defender - MOW, Petitioner
Richard Adams, et al.
Michael Joseph Spillane — Missouri Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Michael Joseph Spillane — Missouri Attorney General's Office, Respondent