Saturday, February 17, 2018
Issue summaries are from ScotusBlog, which also links to papers.
- City of Hays, Kansas v. Vogt: Whether the Fifth Amendment is violated when statements are used at a probable cause hearing but not at a criminal trial.
- Currier v. Virginia: Whether a defendant who consents to severance of multiple charges into sequential trials loses his right under the double jeopardy clause to the issue-preclusive effect of an acquittal.
- Dahda v. U.S.: Whether Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510–2520, requires suppression of evidence obtained pursuant to a wiretap ordr that is facially insufficient because the order exceeds the judge's territorial jurisdiction.
- Rosales-Mireles v. U.S.: Whether, in order to meet the standard for plain error review set forth by the Supreme Court in United States v. Olano that "[t]he Court of Appeals should correct a plain forfeited error affecting substantial rights if the error ‘seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings,’” it is necessary, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit required, that the error be one that “would shock the conscience of the common man, serve as a powerful indictment against our system of justice, or seriously call into question the competence or integrity of the district judge.”