"SCOTUS" UPDATE (SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES): NOVEMBER 2012 SITTING

This blog featuring the activities and work of the Supreme Court of the United States ("SCOTUS") was prepared by the national general practice law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors.

November Sitting 2012

Argument	Docket	Case Page	Issue(s) or Holding	Opinion
10.31.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-444	Missouri v. Frye	The Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel ex­tends to the consideration of plea offers that lapse or are rejected, and that right applies to “all ‘critical’ stages of the criminal proceedings.”	3.21.2012
10.31.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-209	Lafler v. Cooper	Where counsel’s ineffective advice led to an offer’s rejection, and where the prejudice alleged is having to stand trial, a defendant must show that but for the ineffective advice, there is a reasonable probability that the plea offer would have been presented to the court, that the court would have accepted its terms, and that the conviction or sentence, or both, under the offer’s terms would have been less severe than under the actual judgment and sentence imposed.	3.21.2012
11.01.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-788	Rehberg v. Paulk	A witness in a grand jury proceeding is entitled to the same absolute immunity from suit under Section 1983 as a witness who testifies at trial.	4.2.2012
11.01.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-1104	Minneci v. Pollard	Because state tort law authorizes adequate alternative damages actions in this case, no Bivens remedy can be implied.	1.10.2012
11.02.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-895	Gonzalez v. Thaler	Section 2253(c)(3) is a mandatory but nonjurisdictional rule. The failure of a certificate of appealability to “indicate” a constitutional issue does not deprive a court of appeals of jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. Moreover, for a state prisoner who does not seek review in a state’s high­est court, the judgment becomes “final” for purposes of Section 2244(d)(1)(A) upon “expiration of the time for seeking such review.” The petitioner’s appeal in this case was therefore untimely.	1.10.2012
11.02.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-8974	Perry v. New Hampshire	The Due Process Clause does not require an inquiry into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when the identification was not procured under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances by law enforcement.	1.11.2012
11.7.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-577	Kawashima v. Holder	Violations of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7206(1) and (2), which preclude making (or assisting in the making of) a false tax return, are crimes “involv[ing] fraud or deceit” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i) and are therefore aggravated felonies for purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., when the loss to the govern­ment exceeds $10,000.	2.21.2012
11.7.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-699	M.B.Z. v. Clinton	The political question doctrine does not bar courts from deciding whether § 214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which permits U.S. citizens born in Jerusalem to request that their passports state “Israel” as their place of birth, impermissibly intrudes on the President’s powers under the Constitution.	3.26.2012
11.8.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-1259	U.S. v. Jones	Attaching a GPS device to a vehicle and then using the device to monitor the vehicle’s movements constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.	1.23.2012
11.8.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-8145	Smith v. Cain	The substantial Brady claims in the case require a reversal of the petitioner’s conviction.	1.10.2012
11.9.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-879	Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products	Petitioners’ state-law design-defect and failure-to-warn claims fall within the field of locomotive equipment regulation pre-empted by the Locomotive Inspection Act, as that field was defined in Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.	2.29.2012
11.9.2011 Tr. Aud.	10-224	National Meat Association v. Harris	The Federal Meat Inspection Act expressly preempts a California law regulating the treatment of non-ambulatory pigs at federal­ly inspected slaughterhouses.	1.23.2012