Petitions of the week

Issue:Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred in concludingin direct conflict with Virginias highest court and other courtsthat a decision of the Supreme Court,Montgomery v. Louisiana, addressing whether a new constitutional rule announced in an earlier decision,Miller v. Alabama, applies retroactively on collateral review may properly be interpreted as modifying and substantively expanding the very rule whose retroactivity was in question.

Issue:Whether individuals whose personal information is held in a database breached by hackers have Article III standing simply by virtue of the breach even without concrete injury, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 3rd, 6th, 7th, 9th and District of Columbia Circuits have held, or whether concrete injury as a result of the breach is required for Article III standing, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 8th Circuits have held.

Issue:Whether, and to what extent, the discretionary-function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2680(a), restricts the FTCAs law enforcement proviso, which waives the United States sovereign immunity for [a]ny claim arising out of an enumerated list of intentional common-law torts committed by federal law-enforcement officers.

Issue:Whether the South Carolina Supreme Court erred when it held, in conflict with many federal courts of appeals, that a trial court may not deny a criminal defendants motion to represent himself based on the defendants improper motive or unethical conduct.