Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
In Re Onofre Serrano
IFP petition
Questions presented
-
Whether the Ninth Circuit arbitrarily concluded that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right?
-
Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's conclusion that Petitioner committed a public offense as opposed to presumptive lawful activity under N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v Bruen?
-
Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's procedural holding that Petitioner had the opportunity to litigate his claim under Stone v Powell and Townsend v Sain?
-
Whether the Deputy District Attorney ("DDA") failure to produce evidence relating to the purported resisting, underlying suspicion and officer Rardin’s credibility at preliminary hearing/ motion to suppress evidence constituted a violation of Petitioner's rights as described in Brady v Maryland and/or Napue v Illinois?
-
Whether there was reasonable or probable cause and/or all the elements satisfied at trial based on sufficient evidence under Bunkley v Florida and/or Fiore v White?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Onofre Serrano
For respondent
—
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 14 2025Petition DENIED.
- Sep 25 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/10/2025.
- Jul 02 2025Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 8, 2025)