Cockle Law » Cockle Blog

Asset Forfeiture and the Right to Counsel: An Inmate’s Petition and Reply

Andy Cockle — Fri, 18 May 2012 19:56:54 +0000

Alvin Thomas is a federal inmate incarcerated in Kentucky, sentenced to 20-years imprisonment for cocaine distribution and possession. During the course of the prosecution, government lawyers initiated asset forfeiture proceedings against his property. Mr. Thomas asserts that because those efforts prevented him from using his assets to hire an attorney of his choice, the government has unconstitutionally impaired his right to counsel. Following its initial Conference, the U.S. Supreme Court requested a response from the government (Case No. 11-813, find the docket here).

Mr. Thomas has asked us to post his briefs:

Petition, filed on December 27, 2011

Reply, filed on May 14, 2012

We have also posted a link to the government’s response:

Brief in Opposition, filed May 2, 2012

The case is scheduled for another Conference on May 31^st.

New Petitions Recently Filed by Cockle Printing

Andy Cockle — Fri, 18 May 2012 16:39:57 +0000

Wyoming v. U.S. Dept. of Agricultrue, filed on May 15, 2012

Poblete v. Arizona, filed on May 15, 2012

Louisiana v. Leonard, filed on May 17, 2012

Ellis v. Hanson, filed May 10, 2012

Non-Compliant Petitions: A Guide to Resubmitting a Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Mathew Planalp — Thu, 17 May 2012 17:52:53 +0000

The Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court is required by Rule 14.5 not to docket those petitions for writ of certiorari that do “not comply with the substance of [the] Rules.” The Clerk can reject and return documents that are not in the proper format, are illegible or missing required sections, or have omitted the proper lower court opinions, orders or judgments that the Supreme Court is being asked to review (Rule 14.1 establishes the required sections of a petition). If it is determined that such a petition was submitted timely and in good faith, the Clerk will return it with a letter indicating the deficiencies and the time period (typically 60 days after the rejection) within which to resubmit the petition. Petitioners who are denied in forma pauperis (IFP) status may also be allowed to resolve any deficiencies and resubmit their petitions (a guide to IFP denials can be found here).

Only a select group of changes may be made to a petition before it is resubmitted to the Court for docketing:

Table of Contents and Table of Authorities may be changed to reflect new formatting, additions, and omissions.
Opinions Below and Jurisdiction may be changed to reflect procedural history and the Court’s authority to hear the case.
Omitted (but mandatory) sections may be inserted (for example, Constitutional Provisions or Statement of the Case).
Grammatical changes may be made (for example, correcting improper word usage or adding commas after case names).
Appendix documents required under Rule 14.1 may be added (if not originally included in the petitioner’s filing).
Appendix documents not required under Rule 14.1 may be omitted.
Table of Appendices and appendix references in the brief can be changed to reflect additions to the appendix.

It is important to note that the Clerk may not docket a resubmitted petition if a change has been made to the “substance” of that petition. After close communication with the Court, the staff at Cockle have determined that the following alterations constitute a change in “substance”:

Changes to the Questions Presented (beyond punctuation).
Changes to the Argument (beyond grammar).
The citation of new case law.

Petitioners who require assistance in the printing and filing of their resubmitted petitions should send their originally filed documents and deficiency letter from the Court to Cockle Printing in order to begin generating a rule-compliant booklet in time to meet the Court’s updated due date.

In Forma Pauperis Filings and Denial of In Forma Pauperis Status: A Pro Se Guide to the Submission of an Acceptable Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Mathew Planalp — Thu, 17 May 2012 17:47:48 +0000

In forma pauperis (IFP) proceedings are those cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court allows an indigent party to file a petition for writ of certiorari without paying the $300 filing fee or preparing a printed booklet. If leave is denied, the petitioner is given a due date (typically 21 days after the denial) to file the petition in booklet format in accordance with Rule 33.1 and pay the filing fee. As petitioners often realize, however, the vast majority of IFP applications filed fall short of demonstrating the degree of indigency necessary for IFP status. While the preponderance of cases in which an IFP application is denied are civil cases, IFP status has been denied in criminal cases as well, even when the party was incarcerated. See Gressman, E., et al., Supreme Court Practice, at 564 (9th ed.).

Petitioners who have been denied IFP status have two options: they can file a motion to reconsider the denial, or, they can call the knowledgeable staff at Cockle Printing to arrange for the preparation of a Rule 33.1 booklet (a sample of our work can be found here).

The leading Supreme Court practitioner’s guide and a long line of cases suggest that “it seems futile to request that the Court rehear or reconsider an order denying leave to proceed IFP. The Court will almost certainly deny such a motion.” See Gressman, at 570; Corey v. Mendel, 534 U.S. 809 (2001); In re Gaydos, 519 U.S. 1089 (1997); Martin v. Mrvos, 502 U.S. 1028 (1992). Additionally, the 21 day period in which to submit a booklet petition has started to run and will not be extended upon the Court’s receipt of a motion to reconsider.

Thus, many petitioners who have been denied IFP status often place their trust in Cockle Printing’s expert Document Analysts to transform their IFP submissions into rule-compliant booklets. Cockle Printing ensures that the petition and appendix are typeset in the proper Century family font, printed on paper of the appropriate size and weight and bound with the correct color of cover.

After the booklet petition has been printed and filed with the Clerk, the Court will set the respondent’s due date and distribute the document for an upcoming conference (in which the Court will consider whether or not to grant the writ). Should the Court advance the case to the merits stage, it will set schedules for oral argument and the submission of additional briefs.

IFP petitioners who require assistance in their Rule 33.1 filing should send their petition and appendix documents to Cockle Printing in order to begin generating a rule-compliant booklet in time to meet the Court’s updated due date.