Here are the criminal and related cases for the October, November, and December calendars of the U.S. Supreme Court. The link in the case number for each case is to the docket, which in turn has a link to the "question presented" page. Note that in most cases the question presented is drafted by the attorney for the party who lost in the lower court, not by the Supreme Court, and the QP is often phrased in a slanted way.
Tuesday, October 7:
Herring v. United States, No. 07-513: Search incident to an arrest by an officer who relied on erroneous info negligently provided by another officer.
Arizona v. Gant, No. 07-542: Search of car following valid arrest of driver. See New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981).
Tuesday, October 14:
Pearson v. Callahan, No. 07-751: "Consent once removed" exception to warrant requirement, entry by police after undercover informant was invited in.
These should keep Professor LaFave busy on next year's Search and Seizure supplement.
Wednesday, October 15:
Waddington v. Sarausad, No. 07-772: Ninth Circuit granted federal habeas relief for perceived error of state law. Again. See Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (1991).
Hedgpeth v. Pulido, No. 07-544 (formerly Chrones v. Pulido): Habeas harmless error standard on jury instruction issue. CJLF brief here.
Oregon v. Ice, No. 07-901: Whether the Apprendi rule requires jury findings on fact required by state law to make sentences for separate crimes run consecutively. CJLF brief here.
Tuesday, November 4:
Jimenez v. Quarterman, No. 07-6984: On the federal habeas statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). When a state court allows an "out-of-time" appeal, does that restart the clock or just pause it?
Wednesday, November 5:
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein, No. 07-854: Immunity for supervising prosecutor.
Monday, November 10:
Chambers v. United States, No. 06-11206: On failure to report for confinement as a "violent felony" for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). (Online docket file seems to be missing for this case.)
United States v. Hayes, No. 07-608: Whether, for the purpose of the federal statute limiting gun possession, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" is limited to crimes having a domestic relationship as an element.
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, No. 07-591: Confrontation of lab techs.
Wednesday, November 12:
Bell v. Kelly, No. 07-1223: Examines the relationship between (1) the statutory requirement for deference to the state court decision on claims decided on the merits and (2) the facts before the state court in that decision. Petitioner's statement of the question presented as involving "evidence of prejudice the state court refused to consider" assumes a disputed interpretation of the record.
Wednesday, December 3:
Philip Morris USA v. Williams, No. 07-1216: Not a criminal or related case, but I have included it here because it involves the question of procedural default as an "adequate state ground," an issue that comes up frequently in habeas corpus. CJLF brief supporting neither party (saying, in essence, we don't care who wins the case, but please clean up the mess that is the "adequate state ground" doctrine) is here.
Tuesday, December 9:
Arizona v. Johnson, No. 07-1122: Frisk of dangerous-looking passenger in lawfully stopped car, who may or may not have been "seized" at the time of the frisk. More grist for the mill of Professor LaFave, whose treatise is actually helpful for the prosecution side for a change. CJLF brief here.
Cone v. Bell, No. 07-1114: Procedural default and habeas corpus. Petitioner's "question presented" asks, "Is a federal habeas claim 'procedurally defaulted' because it has been presented twice to the state courts?" Of course not, but there is more to this case than meets the eye. More on this later.
Leave a comment