evidentiary-errors
5 cases — ← All topics
| Case | Title | Lower Court | Docketed | Status | Flags | Tags | Question Presented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22-7784 | Demarcus Donte Ivey v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2023-06-14 | Denied | Amici (1)Response WaivedIFP | burden-of-proof chapman-v-california constitutional-error criminal-procedure cumulative-error-doctrine evidentiary-errors harmless-error standard-of-review | When should evidentiary errors in a federal criminal trial be evaluated for their cumulative impact on the fundamental fairness of the trial? |
| 22-7155 | Kalid Koron Ocean-Avent v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2023-03-30 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | burden-of-proof criminal-law criminal-procedure due-process evidence evidentiary-errors fair-trial firearm firearm-possession jury reasonable-doubt | Whether the Government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. OceanAvent possessed a firearm |
| 21-6970 | Nigel Kinte Wright v. Steven Rivard, Warden | Sixth Circuit | 2022-01-26 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | criminal-trial cumulative-errors due-process evidentiary-errors fundamental-fairness fundamental-unfairness harmless-error judicial-review sixth-amendment | To what extent is the test for analyzing whether cumulative evidentiary errors created a fundamentally unfair criminal trial coextensive with the test… |
| 20-7702 | Covia Dzell Smith v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2021-04-09 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | career-offender criminal-procedure due-process evidentiary-errors fair-trial fourth-circuit-review ineffective-assistance right-to-present-defense sentencing sentencing-guidelines | Whether trial counsel's ineffective assistance deprived Mr. Smith of the right to offer evidence in his defense |
| 20-5073 | Gilberto Martinez-Hernandez v. United States | Ninth Circuit | 2020-07-15 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | appellate-procedure appellate-review civil-procedure clear-error evidentiary-errors harmless-error judicial-review judicial-standard legal-sufficiency standard-of-review | Whether the court of appeals committed clear error by concluding that significant evidentiary errors were harmless |