Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Lumbsden A. Sangster v. Anthony Valencia

Paid petition · Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, No. E073478 · judgment November 19, 2020

Certiorari denied · October 4, 2021
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate: the model weighted this down for a self-represented petitioner.

Questions presented

  1. Whether the fair report privilege apply to a private communication between a police officer and a member of the press is supported in a defamation cases.

  2. Whether Section § 47 (d), is privilege even though physical evidence were planted/altered in furtherance qualified a defendant for this subdivision in a defamation case. (See Section § 47(b)(2)).

  3. Does the California Evidence Code EVID § 250, apply to evidence of records marked as exhibits in a complaint.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Lumbsden A. Sangster

For respondent
Matthew John Marnell
San Bernardino County Counsel

Case

Subject area
First Amendment (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Orders
Order list, October 4, 2021 · Certiorari denied
Order list, December 6, 2021 · Rehearing denied

Proceedings

  1. Dec 06 2021
    Rehearing DENIED.
  2. Nov 09 2021
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.
  3. Oct 19 2021
    Petition for Rehearing filed.
    Main DocumentCertificate of Word CountProof of Service
  4. Oct 04 2021
    Petition DENIED.
  5. Aug 18 2021
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
  6. Aug 10 2021
    Waiver of right of respondent Anthony Valencia to respond filed.
    Main Document
  7. Jul 01 2021
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 11, 2021)
    PetitionAppendixProof of ServiceCertificate of Word Count