Category: U.S. Supreme Court

Comedians in Jail and the Right to Counsel

by · Dec 30, 2022 8:12 pm

The WaPo has this story about a strange case on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Jan. 6 conference list.

A Texas inmate filmed as part of a Comedy Central roast by comedian Jeff Ross while in jail is appealing his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the stand-up’s footage was improperly used to sentence him to death for attacking an elderly married couple.

Gabriel Hall was awaiting trial for a high-profile capital murder charge when Ross, known as the “Roastmaster General” for his insult comedy, was invited to Brazos County Jail and interviewed Hall and other inmates in 2015.

Though it never aired, the video was later subpoenaed and presented to the jury by the prosecutor, who argued Hall did not show remorse four years after the 2011 killing. But Hall’s legal team has argued that the taping happened without his lawyers’ knowledge and violated the inmate’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Continue reading . . .

Co-Defendant Statements and Joint Trials

by · Dec 13, 2022 8:18 am

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning took up a case on the perennial knotty problem of the admissibility of co-defendant statements in joint trials. The case is Samia v. United States, No. 22-196. The out-of-court statement of one defendant is admissible against the defendant who made it, but generally not to incriminate other defendants. Continue reading . . .

Venue and Double Jeopardy

by · Dec 13, 2022 8:07 am

Does a venue error equal a Get Out of Jail Free card? That is, if the government files its charges in a locale that is later determined to be incorrect, does the defendant walk regardless of how clearly guilty he is or how atrocious the crime is? Or can he be retried in the venue now deemed correct?

The U.S. Supreme Court took up this question this morning in Smith v. United States, No. 21-1576.

Inducing Illegal Actions and Freedom of Speech

by · Dec 12, 2022 8:52 am

The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up the case of United States v. Hansen, No 22-179, for full briefing and argument. Here is the Question Presented, as phrased by the Solicitor General:

Whether the federal criminal prohibition against encouraging or inducing unlawful immigration for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (B)(i), is facially unconstitutional on First Amendment overbreadth grounds.

The answer would seem to be a clear “no,” but the Ninth Circuit held to the contrary. Continue reading . . .

New U.S. Supreme Court Rules

by · Dec 5, 2022 3:22 pm

The U.S. Supreme Court has amended its rules, effective the first of the year. Among the changes, people filing “friend of the court” briefs no longer have to ask consent of the parties. The clerk’s comments on the changes note, “While the consent requirement may have served a useful gatekeeping function in the past, it no longer does so, and compliance with the rule imposes unnecessary burdens upon litigants and the Court.” Amen. Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Monday

by · Dec 5, 2022 8:14 am

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued an orders list from last week’s conference. No new cases were taken up. There are no criminal cases on this week’s oral argument docket.

The Court currently seems to be less interested in criminal law issues than in past years. To some extent, no news is good news. Federal constitutional limitations on state criminal law run only in the defendant’s favor. In addition, changes in the law in the defendant’s favor often have retroactive effect, while changes in the prosecution’s favor rarely do. So lack of change is, at least in part, good for law enforcement.

On the other hand, there are a lot of rules with no real basis in the Constitution that one might think that an originalist-dominated Supreme Court would want to get rid of. One possible explanation is that the Court has a sort of budget for turmoil and has spent it all in other fields for the time being. That could change as the storms from last term’s decisions subside. Continue reading . . .

Alabama Execution Update

by · Nov 18, 2022 10:21 am

Alabama hit man Kenneth Eugene Smith got a (hopefully brief) respite from his execution yesterday. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted a stay on a different issue than the one noted in this post. The Supreme Court vacated the stay, three Justices dissenting, but the warrant expired at midnight, and the execution team was not able to find a suitable vein in that time.

Execution warrants that are good for one calendar day only are an old tradition, but there is no need for such a limitation. In an era where many judges are prone to issue last-minute stays, whether they are legally justified or not, a one-day window needlessly changes quickly reversed stays into longer ones in practice, as the date-setting machinery must be restarted. This is also very stressful for victims’ families, who often travel to the execution site believing that they are finally going to see long-overdue justice done, only to have it snatched away at the last minute.

States are gradually doing away with the one-day rule. California has a 10-day window, enacted by initiative. Continue reading . . .