Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan| Feb | Mar| Apr| Unscheduled
November 2001
Monday, November 5
Walter Mickens, Jr. v. Warden Taylor
No. 00-9285
Subject:
Sixth Amendment, Conflict of Interest, Due Process
Question:
Did the Court of Appeals err in holding that a defendant must
show an actual conflict of interest and an adverse effect in order to establish a
Sixth Amendment violation where a trial court fails to inquire into a potential
conflict of interest about which it reasonably should have known?
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Decided: September 14, 2000 [Vacated]
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Order: October 23, 2000
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Decided: February 16, 2001
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Amended: March 6, 2001
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Order: March 26, 2001
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 16, 2001
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: March 27, 2002
Resources:
Briefs:
Parties:
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Tuesday, November 6
United States v. Alphonso Vonn
No. 00-973
Subject:
FRCrP 11(c), Guilty Plea, Right to Assistance of Counsel, Standard of Review
Question:
- Whether a district court's failure to advise a counseled defendant at his guilty plea hearing that he has the right to the
assistance of counsel at trial, as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(3), is subject to plain-error, rather
than harmless-error, review on appeal when the defendant fails to preserve the claim of error in the district court.
- Whether, in determining if a defendant's substantial rights were affected by a district court's deviation from the
requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(3), the court of appeals may review only the transcript of the
guilty plea colloquy, or whether it may also consider other parts of the official record.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
United States v. Mark James Knights
No. 00-1260
Subject:
Fourth Amendment, Probation, Warrantless Search
Question:
Whether respondent's agreement to a term of probation that authorized
any law enforcement officer to search his person or premises with or without
a warrant, and with or without individualized suspicion of wrongdoing, constituted
a valid consent to a search by a law enforcement officer investigating crimes.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Wednesday, November 7
Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams
No. 00-1089
Subject:
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Question:
Whether an impairment that limits an individual's ability to perform
particular job-related manual tasks can constitute a "disability"
under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12102(2)(A),
even if there has been no finding that the plaintiff has been excluded from
a class of jobs or a sufficiently broad range of jobs to establish a substantial
limitation on the "major life activity" of "working,"
and no finding that the plaintiff's impairment substantially limits her
ability to perform manual tasks outside of work.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Petitioner:
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. et al. [PDF]
- Equal Employment Advisory Council et al. [PDF]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security v. Sigmon Coal Company, Inc., et al.
No. 00-1307
Subject:
Question:
The Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act), 26 U.S.C. 9701 et seq., established the United Mine Workers of
America Combined Benefit Fund (Fund) to ensure the continued provision of health-care benefits to retired miners and their
dependents who worked under collective bargaining agreements that promised lifetime health-care benefits. For the purpose of
calculating premiums to be paid to the Fund to finance those health-care benefits, the Coal Act directs the Commissioner of Social
Security to assign responsibility for beneficiaries of the Fund to the "signatory operator" or "related person" of the signatory
operator that formerly employed them, if that signatory operator (or related person) is still "in business." 26 U.S.C. 9706(a).
The question presented is whether the Coal Act permits the Commissioner to assign beneficiaries to the successor in interest of a
signatory operator that is no longer in business.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Monday, November 26
Lance Raygor et al. v. Regents of the University of Minnesota
No. 00-1514
Subject:
Eleventh Amendment, Sovereign Immunity, Statute of Limitations, Age Discrimination
Question:
The Minnesota Supreme Court held that 28 U.S.C. 1367(d), the tolling provision of the supplemental jurisdiction statute, is
unconstitutional as applied to claims against a nonconsenting state defendant. The United States addresses the antecedent
question of whether Section 1367(d) may fairly be construed to avoid that constitutional question.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
William Arthur Kelly v. South Carolina
No. 00-9280
Subject:
Death Penalty, Parole Ineligibility, Jury Instructions
Question:
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Tuesday, November 27
United States v. Ralph Arvizu
No. 00-1519
Subject:
Fourth Amendment, Search and Seizure, Reasonable Suspicion, Totality-of-the-Circumstances Test
Question:
- Whether the court of appeals erroneously departed from the totality-of-the-circumstances test that
governs reasonable-suspicion determinations under the Fourth Amendment by holding that seven facts
observed by a law enforcement officer were entitled to no weight and could not be considered as a matter of
law.
- Whether, under the totality-of-the-circumstances test, the Border Patrol agent in this case had
reasonable suspicion that justified a stop of a vehicle near the Mexican border.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Owasso Independent School District No. 1-011, AKA Owasso Public Schools, et al. v. Kristja J. Falvo, Parent and Next Friend of Her Minor Children, Elizabeth Pletan, Philip Pletan, and Erica Pletan
No. 00-1073
Subject:
Education, Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Student Grading
Question:
Whether allowing students to grade each other's homework and tests as
their teacher goes over the correct answers aloud in class violates FERPA's
prohibition against the release of "education records."
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press et al. [PDF]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund [PDF]
Wednesday, November 28
John Ashcroft, Attorney General v. American Civil Liberties Union, et al.
No. 00-1293
Subject:
Question:
The Child Online Protection Act (COPA) makes it unlawful to make any
communication for commercial purposes by means of the World Wide Web that
is available to minors and that includes material that is "harmful
to minors," unless good faith efforts are made to prevent children
from obtaining access to such material. 47 U.S.C. 231(a)(1) and (c)(1) (Supp.
IV 1998). COPA relies in part on "community standards" to identify
material that is "harmful to minors." 47 U.S.C. 231(e)(6) (Supp.
IV 1998). The question presented is whether the court of appeals properly
barred enforcement of COPA on First Amendment grounds because it relies
on community standards to identify material that is harmful to minors.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Parties:
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent (Petition) [PDF] [RTF]
- Petitioner - Reply (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent [PDF] [RTF]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- American Center for Law and Justice [TEXT]
- Senator John S. McCain et al. [PDF]
- Wallbuilders, Inc. [TEXT]
Amicus - Respondent:
- The Association of American Publishers, Inc. et al [PDF]
- Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America et al. [PDF]
- Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality et al. [TEXT]
David R. McKune, Warden, et al. v. Robert G. Lile
No. 00-1187
Subject:
Fifth Amendment, Right Against Self-Incrimination, Sexual Abuse Treatment Program
Question:
Whether the Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination
prevents a State from encouraging incarcerated sexual offenders to participate
in a clinical rehabilitative program, in which participants must accept
responsibility for their offenses, by conditioning the availability of certain
institutional privileges on participation in the program.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Petitioner:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]