Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Vamsidhar Vurimindi v. Pennsylvania
IFP petition · Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Office, No. 2272 EDA 2023 · judgment February 5, 2025
Question presented
I. Whether a state violates the Due Process Clause by abolishing the writ of error coram nobis and then rigidly applying a post-conviction custody requirement to permanently bar any judicial review of a conviction that is void ab initio under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment? II. Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause permits a state to re-litigate an issue of ultimate fact, a defendant’s criminal intent, that was necessarily determined by a prior acquittal, merely by alleging new acts that are used to bootstrap the acquitted conduct as pattern evidence?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Vamsidhar Vurimindi
For respondent
Katherine Elizabeth Ernst
Philadelphia District Attorney's Office
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Nov 10 2025The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
- Oct 23 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
- Oct 16 2025Waiver of right of respondent Pennsylvania to respond filed.
- Sep 16 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 3, 2025)