Case Status
5 results
ALABAMA v. SHELTON, LeREED (21968)
Order dated: 05/14/01Docket number: 00-1214
Action:
The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted.
ALABAMA v. SHELTON, LeREED (21968)
Order dated: 10/01/01Docket number: 00-1214
Action:
The motion of Texas, et al., for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument is granted.
ALABAMA v. SHELTON, LeREED (21968)
Order dated: 10/18/01Docket number: 00-1214
Action:
This case is removed from the November 2001 Argument Calendar. Charles Fried, Esquire, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, is invited to file a brief, and to argue, as amicus curiae, in opposition to the judgment below and in support of the following position: where counsel is not afforded to an indigent defendant, the Constitution of the United States does not bar the imposition of a suspended or probationary sentence upon conviction of a misdemeanor, even though the defendant might be incarcerated in the event probation is revoked. The brief as amicus curiae is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon the parties on or before 3 p.m., Monday, December 10, 2001. Any response by the parties may be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing parties and amicus curiae on or before 3 p.m., Friday, January 11, 2002. Rule 29.2 is suspended in this case. Ten minutes of petitioner’s time are allotted to Mr. Fried for oral argument.
ALABAMA v. SHELTON, LeREED (21968)
Order dated: 10/29/01Docket number: 00-1214
Action:
The motion of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyer for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted.
ALABAMA v. SHELTON, LeREED (21968)
Order dated: 01/22/02Docket number: 00-1214
Action:
The motion of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is granted to be divided as follows: 20 minutes for respondent and 10 minutes for amicus curiae. The motion of petitioner for additional time for oral argument is denied. The order of October 1, 2001, granting the motion of Texas, et al., for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument is rescinded.
A description of the questions presented by the case has been prepared:
In the light of the actual imprisonment standard established in Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972), and refined in Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979), does the imposition of a suspended or conditional sentence in a misdemeanor case invoke a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel?
An opinion has been handed down: