Jump to content

Ayestas v. Davis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ayestas v. Davis
Decided March 21, 2018
Full case nameAyestas v. Davis
Citations584 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
An ex parte decision by a judge can still be judicial in nature.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch
Case opinions
MajorityAlito, joined by unanimous
ConcurrenceSotomayor

Ayestas v. Davis, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an ex parte decision by a judge can still be judicial in nature.[1][2]

Description

[edit]

The case concerned an imprisoned person's funding request for a habeas corpus petition under a law that gave a judge discretion to approve funds that were "reasonably necessary." A judge denied the request because the imprisoned person, Ayesta, did not show a "substantial need" for the funds. The Supreme Court reversed because this "substantial need" standard was more demanding than the "reasonably necessary" language of the statute. Indeed, in the Court's estimation, the lower court was effectively requiring Ayesta to prove his case before being allowed to fund the investigation.[3]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Ayestas v. Davis, 584 U.S. ___ (2018)
  2. ^ Lieberman, Jethro K. (2018). "Cases or Controversies". The 2018 Supplement to A Practical Companion to the Constitution. p. 6.
  3. ^ Lieberman, Jethro K. (2018). "Habeas Corpus". The 2018 Supplement to A Practical Companion to the Constitution. p. 13.
[edit]