Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Arsen Manson v. California, et al.
IFP petition · Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, No. B345846 · judgment January 8, 2026
Question presented
Under SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Rule 10 (c), Petitioner Declares a Conflict of Interest in FACTUAL FUNDING SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE during on ORIGINAL Los angeles County Superior Court case No. MA059036 (The PEOPLE of The STATE of CALIFORNIA v. ARSEN MANSON, (On March 13, 2013, Judgment entry date see "Conflict of Interest Declares on First trial on March 18, 2013" (Appendix F, p. 26)). The STATE of CALIFORNIA on October 28, 2013, FOUND Petitioner GUILTY for FELONY and sentenced to State Prison on 4.5 years. STATE of CALIFORNIA . on June 12, 2019, FOUND Petitioner NOT GOULTY and case was Fully DISMISSED. QUESTION IS, HOW THE JUDGMENT PROVE ITS CONVICTION UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 28 U.S.C. §§ 2072-2074 (Rules Enabling Act) and FEDERAL RULE of EVIDENCE (FRE) 803(22), AS THEY EXISTED in March 2013?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Arsen Manson
For respondent
Elizabeth Sybil Angres
State of California Attorney
Case
Subject area
Criminal Procedure (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Order
Order list, October 5, 2026 · Certiorari denied
Proceedings
- Oct 05 2026Petition DENIED.
- Sep 10 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2026.
- Sep 03 2026Waiver of right of respondent California, et al. to respond filed.
- May 20 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 17, 2026)