The Court granted certiorari today in five cases, two of which were consolidated for one hour of argument.  The Court did not call for the views of the Solicitor General in any cases.

As John Elwood noted in his November 10 Relist Watch, the Court had been holding one of today’s granted petitions, Hill v. United States, to be considered alongside several other petitions that raise the same issue:  whether the Fair Sentencing Act (which reduced the crack-powder sentencing differential) applies in an initial sentencing proceeding that takes place on or after the statute’s effective date if the offense occurred before that date.   John also noted that the government’s brief in Hill agreed that the Court should grant cert. Hill has been consolidated with Dorsey v. United States (case page forthcoming), for a total of one hour of argument.

More details on today’s granted cases follow the jump.

Hill v. United States (Granted )

Docket: 11-5721
Issue(s): Whether the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 applies in an initial sentencing proceeding that takes place on or after the statute’s effective date if the offense occurred before that date.

Certiorari stage documents:

Vasquez v. United States (Granted )

Docket: 11-199
Issue(s): Whether the Seventh Circuit violated this Court's precedent on harmless error when it focused its harmless error analysis solely on the weight of the untainted evidence without considering the potential effect of the error (the erroneous admission of trial counsel's statements that his client would lose the case and should plead guilty for their truth) on this jury; and (2) whether the Seventh Circuit violated Mr. Vasquez's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial by determining that Mr. Vasquez should have been convicted without considering the effects of the district court's error on the jury that heard the case.

Certiorari stage documents:

Southern Union Company v. United States (Granted )

Docket: 11-94
Issue(s): Whether the Fifth and Sixth Amendment principles that this Court established in Apprendi v. New Jersey, and its progeny, apply to the imposition of criminal fines.

Certiorari stage documents:

Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. (Granted )

Note: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for and/or contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents the petitioners in this case.
Docket: 11-204
Issue(s): (1) Whether deference is owed to the Secretary of Labor's interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act's outside sales exemption and related regulations; and (2) whether the Fair Labor Standards Act's outside sales exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Certiorari stage documents:

Posted in Merits Cases

Recommended Citation: Kali Borkoski, Updated: Details on today’s grants, SCOTUSblog (Nov. 28, 2011, 10:50 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/11/details-on-todays-grants-4/