« Report on the NJ Blakely arguments | Main | Scalia speaks out on Roper »

March 14, 2005

Quick tour around the blogsphere

A relatively quiet afternoon means time to find and read some blog posts of note:

March 14, 2005 at 06:45 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d8347384e069e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Quick tour around the blogsphere:

Comments

I am a defense attorney practicing in the 11CTA. Recently I filed for cert in a case where the 11 Cir. refused to allow me to supplement the appeal with a Blakely issue when the initial brief was filed prior to Blakely. The Solicitor General filed a memorandum stating that GRV was appropriate. Several weeks later I received a call from a clerk at the S.Ct. letting me know that the Solicitor General wanted to file a supplemental response & wondering if I wanted the case distributed or held back. According to the clerk the Solicitor General had selected 5 cases from the 11th Cir. to file a response in becuase of the 11th Cir. practice of prohibiting a Rule 28(j) brief on the issue....the assistant SG has not returned my call to try to find out what position they are taking. Does anyone have a prediction on what position the SG will take on this? I am arguing that US v. Levy 391 F.3d 327 is wrongly decided.

Posted by: Lynn Fant | Mar 22, 2005 9:00:59 AM

I am a defense attorney practicing in the 11CTA. Recently I filed for cert in a case where the 11 Cir. refused to allow me to supplement the appeal with a Blakely issue when the initial brief was filed prior to Blakely. The Solicitor General filed a memorandum stating that GRV was appropriate. Several weeks later I received a call from a clerk at the S.Ct. letting me know that the Solicitor General wanted to file a supplemental response & wondering if I wanted the case distributed or held back. According to the clerk the Solicitor General had selected 5 cases from the 11th Cir. to file a response in becuase of the 11th Cir. practice of prohibiting a Rule 28(j) brief on the issue....the assistant SG has not returned my call to try to find out what position they are taking. Does anyone have a prediction on what position the SG will take on this? I am arguing that US v. Levy 391 F.3d 327 is wrongly decided.

Posted by: Lynn Fant | Mar 22, 2005 9:01:39 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB