Petitions of the week
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address the circumstances under which a party that physically supplies a vessel with fuel or other necessaries possesses a statutory maritime lien; when absolute immunity shields a prosecutors handling of post-conviction DNA testing under Imbler v. Pachtman; and whether Martinez v. RyanandTrevino v. Thaler apply to ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claims that were technically raised in state habeas proceedings, but were unsubstantiated because of the ineffective assistance of state habeas counsel.
Thepetitions of the week are:
Issue:WhetherMartinez v. RyanandTrevino v. Thalerapply to ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claims that were technically raised in state habeas proceedings but went wholly unsubstantiated due to the ineffective assistance of state habeas counsel.
Issue:Whether absolute immunity shields a prosecutors unconstitutional handling of post-conviction DNA testing underImbler v. Pachtmanwhen the prosecutors personal involvement with legal proceedings has ended, there is no ongoing judicial proceeding in which the prosecutor could function as an advocate, and all existing direct and collateral post-conviction appeals have been exhausted.
Issue:Whether a party that physically supplies a vessel with fuel or other necessaries possesses a statutory maritime lien when the vessel owner or its authorized agent ordered those necessaries and directed the supplier to provide them, regardless of contractual relationships between the vessel owner and intermediate parties.
Issue:Whether a party that physically supplies a vessel with fuel or other necessaries possesses a statutory maritime lien when the vessel owner or its authorized agent ordered those necessaries and directed the supplier to provide them, regardless of contractual relationships between the vessel owner and intermediate parties.
Posted in Cases in the Pipeline
Cases: Smith v. Mays, Moon v. County of El Paso, Texas, NuStar Energy Services Inc. v. ING Bank N.V., NuStar Energy Services Inc. v. ING Bank N.V.