Martin v. Johnson
Petition for certiorari denied on February 22, 2022
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit violated the backward-looking nature of Section 2254(d) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and the clear mandates announced by the Supreme Court in Sexton v. Beaudreaux, Cullen v. Pinholster, and Harrington v. Richter when it considered " and based its ultimate decision upon " an argument the respondent, Alonzo Cortez Johnson, never made to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on direct appeal.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Reductions on deductions and state courts on out-of-state businesses (Andrew Hamm, January 15, 2022)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 12/12/2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 18, 2022) |
| 01/13/2022 | Brief of respondent Alonzo Cortez Johnson in opposition filed. |
| 01/13/2022 | Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Alonzo Cortez Johnson. |
| 01/27/2022 | Reply of petitioner Jimmy Martin, Warden filed. |
| 02/02/2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022. |
| 02/22/2022 | Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED. |
| 02/22/2022 | Petition DENIED. |