Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Roxanne Torres v. Janice Madrid, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 18-2134 · judgment May 2, 2019

Decided · March 25, 2021
Pre-decision estimate: 7% cert probability (95% interval 4%–12%)

Before the decision, about 1.7× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a Tenth Circuit decision below.

Question presented

Police officers shot Petitioner, but she drove away and temporarily eluded capture. In this excessive force suit, the district court granted summary judgment for the officers on the ground that no Fourth Amendment "seizure" occurred. The Tenth Circuit affirmed, reasoning that an officer's application of physical force is not a seizure if the person upon whom the force is applied is able to evade apprehension. The question presented is: Is an unsuccessful attempt to detain a suspect by use of physical force a "seizure" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, as the Eighth; Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits and the New Mexico Supreme Court hold, or must physical force be successful in detaining a suspect to constitute a "seizure," as the Tenth Circuit and the D.C. Court of Appeals hold? PRESS RELEASE OF MARCH 16, 2020 IN KEEPING WITH PUBLIC HEALTH PRECAUTIONS RECOMMENDED IN RESPONSE TO COVID-19, THE SUPREME COURT IS POSTPONING THE ORAL ARGUMENTS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR THE MARCH SESSION. 4/13/2020: ARGUMENT TO BE RESCHEDULED FOR THE OCTOBER TERM 2020

Counsel of record

For petitioner
E. Joshua Rosenkranz
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

For respondent
Mark Daniel Standridge
Jarmie & Rogers, P.C.

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Amicus briefs
4 cert-stage · 9 merits
(8 supporting pet./neither, 1 respondent)

Argument & decision

Argued October 14, 2020 — Kelsi B. Corkran · Mark D. Standridge. Audio and transcript

Decided March 25, 2021.

Proceedings

  1. Apr 26 2021
    JUDGMENT ISSUED.
  2. Mar 25 2021
    Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined. Barrett, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
  3. Oct 14 2020
    Argued. For petitioner: Kelsi B. Corkran, Washington, D. C.; and Rebecca Taibleson, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Mark D. Standridge, Las Cruces, N. M.
  4. Jul 13 2020
    SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, October 14, 2020.
  5. Apr 13 2020
    Argument to be rescheduled for the October Term 2020.
  6. Mar 25 2020
    Reply of petitioner Roxanne Torres filed. (Distributed)
  7. Mar 16 2020
    ORAL ARGUMENT POSTPONED.
  8. Mar 09 2020
    Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
  9. Mar 09 2020
    Brief amici curiae of National Association of Counties, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  10. Mar 02 2020
    Brief of respondents Janice Madrid, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  11. Feb 19 2020
    CIRCULATED
  12. Feb 19 2020
    Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit.
  13. Feb 19 2020
    Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
  14. Feb 19 2020
    The record of the USCA 10th Circuit is available on PACER.
  15. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amici curiae of The Rutherford Institute and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
  16. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. filed.
  17. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amici curiae of Fourth Amendment Scholars filed.
  18. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.
  19. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amici curiae of The American Association for Justice, the Cato Institute, et al. filed.
  20. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amicus curiae of Restore the Fourth, Inc. filed.
  21. Feb 07 2020
    Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of New Mexico, et al. filed.
  22. Feb 06 2020
    Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.
  23. Jan 31 2020
    SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 30, 2020.
  24. Jan 31 2020
    Joint appendix filed.
  25. Jan 31 2020
    Brief of petitioner Roxanne Torres filed.
  26. Jan 23 2020
    Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Roxanne Torres.
  27. Jan 23 2020
    Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, Janice Madrid, et al.
  28. Dec 18 2019
    Petition GRANTED.
  29. Nov 26 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2019.
  30. Nov 25 2019
    Reply of petitioner Roxanne Torres filed.
  31. Nov 12 2019
    Brief of respondents Janice Madrid, et al. in opposition filed.
  32. Oct 10 2019
    Response Requested. (Due November 12, 2019)
  33. Oct 09 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.
  34. Oct 04 2019
    Brief amici curiae of Fourth Amendment Scholars filed.
  35. Oct 04 2019
    Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.
  36. Oct 03 2019
    Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
  37. Oct 03 2019
    Waiver of right of respondent Janice Madrid, et al. to respond filed.
  38. Oct 02 2019
    Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of New Mexico, filed.
  39. Aug 30 2019
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 4, 2019)
  40. Jul 15 2019
    Application (19A45) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until August 30, 2019.
  41. Jul 08 2019
    Application (19A45) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 31, 2019 to August 30, 2019, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
    Main DocumentProof of Service