Petitions to watch | Conference of December 8

Petitions to watch | Conference of December 8In its conference of December 8, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether  the death penalty in and of itself violates the Eighth Amendment, in light of contemporary standards of decency; whether a court’s exercise of in rem jurisdiction overcomes the jurisdictional bar of tribal sovereign immunity when the tribe has […]

The post Petitions to watch | Conference of December 8 appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Petitions to watch | Conference of December 8

In its conference of December 8, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether  the death penalty in and of itself violates the Eighth Amendment, in light of contemporary standards of decency; whether a court’s exercise of in rem jurisdiction overcomes the jurisdictional bar of tribal sovereign immunity when the tribe has not waived immunity, and Congress has not unequivocally abrogated it; and whether the rule of American Pipe and Construction Co. v. Utah tolls statutes of limitations to permit a previously absent class member to bring a subsequent class action outside the applicable limitations period.

17-333

Issues: (1) Whether the majority of the three-judge district court erred in holding that, to establish an actual, concrete injury in a First Amendment retaliation challenge to a partisan gerrymander, a plaintiff must prove that the gerrymander has dictated and will continue to dictate the outcome of every election held in the district under the gerrymandered map; (2) whether the majority erred in holding that the Mt. Healthy City Board of Education v. Doyle burden-shifting framework is inapplicable to First Amendment retaliation challenges to partisan gerrymanders; and (3) whether, regardless of the applicable legal standards, the majority erred in holding that the present record does not permit a finding that the 2011 gerrymander was a but-for cause of the Democratic victories in the district in 2012, 2014, or 2016.

16-9672

Issues: (1) Whether the sentence-modification limits in 18 U.S.C. § 3582 are jurisdictional; and (2) whether a substantial-assistance departure from a statutory mandatory minimum sentence that is higher than the defendant’s guideline range categorically renders that defendant ineligible for an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) sentence reduction.

17-432

Issue: Whether the rule of American Pipe and Construction Co. v. Utah tolls statutes of limitations to permit a previously absent class member to bring a subsequent class action outside the applicable limitations period.

17-251

Issues: (1) Whether Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme, which includes so many aggravating circumstances that virtually every defendant convicted of first-degree murder is eligible for death, violates the Eighth Amendment; and (2) whether the death penalty in and of itself violates the Eighth Amendment, in light of contemporary standards of decency.

16-9649

Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit erred in vacating and remanding the district court’s disposition of petitioner’s motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) in light of intervening decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit and the Supreme Court.

17-5716

Issue: Whether a defendant who is subject to a statutory mandatory minimum sentence, but who substantially assisted the government and received a sentence below the mandatory minimum pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), is eligible for a further sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), when the Sentencing Commission retroactively lowers the advisory sentencing guidelines range that would have applied in the absence of the statutory mandatory minimum.

17-132

Issue: Whether the jury instruction—that the defendant’s actions were “evidence of [the requisite intent] . . . unless there is believable evidence to the contrary”—violated due process by shifting to the defendant the burden of producing “believable evidence” to show that he lacked the requisite intent.

16-9695

Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit erred in vacating and remanding the district court’s disposition of petitioner’s motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) in light of intervening decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit and the Supreme Court.

17-5165

Issue: Whether Richardson v. United States precludes a double jeopardy appeal based on evidentiary insufficiency when the jury returns a guilty verdict that is set aside for a new trial.

16-9604

Issue: Whether Missouri’s second-degree burglary statute is divisible into two offenses with separate elements for the purpose of analyzing whether a conviction under that statute qualifies as a conviction for a “violent felony” as defined in the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii).

17-6075

Issues: (1) Whether reasonable jurists could disagree with the district court’s rejection of the petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion, and, accordingly, whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred in denying a certificate of appealability; (2) whether, given the petitioner’s credible evidence that a juror voted for the death penalty because the petitioner is a “nigger,” the lower court erred in ruling that he failed to make “a substantial showing of the of the denial of a constitutional right” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and (3) whether Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado created a new constitutional claim, and, if not, whether the lower courts erred in denying the petitioner’s motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6).

17-387

Issue: Whether a court’s exercise of in rem jurisdiction overcomes the jurisdictional bar of tribal sovereign immunity when the tribe has not waived immunity, and Congress has not unequivocally abrogated it.

 

The post Petitions to watch | Conference of December 8 appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from http://www.scotusblog.com