Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Dean Hotop, et al. v. City of San Jose, California
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 18-16995 · judgment December 7, 2020
Certiorari denied · October 12, 2021
Pre-decision estimate: 1% cert probability
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
- Does City of San Jose Ordinance 30032 which requires that a landlord produce and transmit his or her business records and information to the City under compulsion of criminal sanctions for non-compliance and without also providing for pre-compliance judicial review constitute a “constructive” search under the Fourth Amendment, and if so, is it unconstitutional?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Frank Alan Weiser
Attorney at Law
For respondent
Malgorzata Laskowska
Office of City Attorney, City of San Jose
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage
Proceedings
- Oct 12 2021Petition DENIED.
- Sep 30 2021Reply of petitioners Dean Hotop, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 15 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
- Aug 30 2021Brief of respondent City of San Jose in opposition filed.
- Jul 16 2021Brief amicus curiae of California Rental Housing Association, Apartment Owners Association of California, Inc. filed.
- Jul 14 2021Brief amicus curiae of Apartment Association of Los Angeles Count, Inc., DBA Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles filed.
- Jul 02 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 30, 2021.
- Jul 01 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 16, 2021 to August 30, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jun 14 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 16, 2021)