Petitions to watch | Conference of 05.19.11

This edition of "Petitions to watch" features cases up for consideration at the Justices' May 19 conference. These are petitions raising issues that Tom has determined to have a reasonable chance of being granted, although we post them here without consideration of whether they present appropriate vehicles in which to decide those issues. Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents the petitioner in this case Title: Johnson v. Bell Docket: 10-1009 Issue(s): What legal standard governs the determination whether a movant alleging fraud under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to resolve disputed questions of material fact? Certiorari stage documents: Opinion below (6th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner's reply Title: Martinez v. Regents of the University of California Docket: 10-1029 Issue(s): (1) Whether a state statute that provides resident tuition rates at public postsecondary institutions to illegal aliens, based on their attendance at high schools in the state, is preempted by 8 U.S.C.§ 1623; (2) whether a court must undertake conflict preemption analysis after concluding that an express preemption provision does not apply in a case involving both types of preemption claims. Certiorari stage documents: Opinion below (California Supreme Court) Petition for certiorari Brief of the Regents of the University of California et al. in opposition Brief of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges et al. in opposition Petitioners' reply (forthcoming) Amicus brief of the Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund, Inc. Amicus brief of U.S. Reps. Lamar Smith et al. The following petitions have been re-listed for the conference of May 19. If any other paid petitions are re-distributed for this conference, we will add them below as soon as their re-distribution is noted on the docket. Title: Kawashima v. Holder Docket: 10-577 Issue(s): (1) Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that petitioners' convictions of filing, and aiding and abetting in filing, a false statement on a corporate tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7206(1) and (2) were aggravated felonies involving fraud and deceit under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), and petitioners were therefore removable; and (2) whether the Ninth Circuit's 2010 amendment of its 2007 final judgment concerning petitioner Fusako Kawashima violated Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, where the government did not seek rehearing or other review of that final judgment in 2007. Certiorari stage documents: Opinion below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Reply of petitioners Title: Messerschmidt v. Millender Docket: 10-704 Issue(s): (1) Whether police officers are entitled to qualified immunity when they obtained a facially valid warrant to search for firearms, firearm-related materials, and gang-related items in the residence of a gang member and felon who had threatened to kill his girlfriend and fired a sawed-off shotgun at her? (2) Whether United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), and Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986), should be reconsidered or clarified? Certiorari stage documents: Opinion Below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Reply of petitioners Title: Khadr v. Obama Docket: 10-751 Issue(s): (1) Whether a district court considering a habeas corpus petition may give conclusive effect to the government's assertion that the individual is unlikely to be tortured if transferred to another country? (2) Whether Section 242(a)(4) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act bars judicial review of claims under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment except in appeals from final orders of deportation, and if so construed, whether Section 242(a)(4) violates the Equal Protection Clause or the Suspension Clause. Certiorari stage documents: Opinion below (D.C. Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioners' reply Title: Rosario v. Griffin Docket: 10-854 Issue(s): Whether application of New York's state constitutional "meaningful representation" standard to evaluate Sixth Amendment claims of ineffective assistance of counsel results in decisions that are "contrary to, or involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law" as required by the federal habeas statute. Certiorari stage documents: Opinion below (2d Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Amicus brief of The Innocence Project Amicus brief of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers et al. Amicus brief of National Association of Legal Investigators et al. Petitioner's reply Title: Martinez v. Ryan Docket: 10-1001 Issue(s): Whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law from raising on direct appeal any claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim Certiorari stage documents: Opinion Below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Reply of petitioner Title: Cavazos v. Smith Docket: 10-1115 Issue(s): Did the Ninth Circuit exceed its authority under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) by granting relief for insufficient evidence based on its acceptance of the cause-of-death testimony of defense experts over the contrary opinion testimony of prosecution experts? Certiorari stage documents: Opinion Below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioners reply

Read more detail on Recent Constitutional Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Petitions to watch | Conference of 05.19.11 rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Petitions to watch | Conference of 05.19.11?

This entry was posted in Constitutional Law and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply