Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Peter A. Beck v. Ohio

Paid petition · Court of Appeals of Ohio, Hamilton County, No. C-150539 · judgment December 14, 2016

Certiorari denied · April 16, 2018

Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

When a Court is confronted with a Motion to Suppress a subpoena issued by a defendant charged with a crime, and the person seeking to quash the subpoena is a third party, that court should not follow the doctrine set out in United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) but rather assess the importance of the subpoenaed information to the defendant and the burden imposed on the third party. Unless that burden substantially outweighs the importance of the information sought, it should deny the Motion to Quash.

For petitioner
Richard M. Kerger
The Kerger Law Firm, LLC

For respondent
Eric E. Murphy
Ohio State Solicitor

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Apr 16 2018
Petition DENIED.
Mar 28 2018
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.
Mar 19 2018
Waiver of right of respondent State of Ohio to respond filed.
Mar 06 2018
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 11, 2018)