Must Listen: Oral Arguments now Available in Millard v. Rankin
Oral argument in the case of Millard v. Rankin, the Colorado case where the registry was found to be cruel and unusual punishment, took place yesterday. The audio for the hearing can be found by clicking on the link below:
Millard-v.-Rankin oral argument
The case documents can be found below and were and hosted compiled courtesy of the Mitchell Hamline School of Law:
- Colorado District Court Opinion | view via Google Scholar
- Defendant-Appellant Merits Brief
- Appellees’ Merits Brief
- Defendant-Appellant’s Reply Brief
- Attorneys General Amicus Brief
- Scholars’ Amicus Brief
- NARSOL Amicus
- Fourth Amended Complaint
- Defendant’s Trial Brief
- Plaintiffs’ Trial Brief
- Plaintiffs’ Rebuttal Closing Argument Brief
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Let’s just hope the Justices’ read the Amici briefs and decide on them for the win.
FAC thank you for the link. Sorry to say this is exactly NOT the way to present a case to the courts. The attorney for Millard should have been WELL prepared for this. Between the “umm’s”, and “uhh’s” and the stuttering, and stepping on his tongue over and over, I had no idea what he was talking about. How hard is it to answer the simple questions put before him? Maybe the state paid him to screw up, or promised to make sure he never advanced to a higher position than a lower court lawyer. It seemed like he was so afraid to speak, he soiled his pants because I could smell it hear in central Floriduh.
if its “already public information” then why have the registry. Why make us report. Why is it my job to provide due diligence for everyone else and potentially incriminate myself every time I report cause lord knows you forget an email you get 5 years probation with a monitor. (I know a guy so don’t think this is crap) Maybe because if they didn’t coerce us into doing it, them updating anything else once our time is done would violate many more of our rights. Imagine their is no registry the police follow you around discover you have a new email and post it to some site for people to see. Why – this would be the big fat whooping misdemeanor they warn the public against…and something to litigate. This is slavery. Think about it. We are forced to work, pay for, leave our familys and report at our expense. Now if we got paid for this information maybe. We are an unprotected class because after our EOS we have laws that apply to us that no-one else can be charged with. Maybe this is far reaching cause no felons can have a gun but then again it is because if we just didn’t have to have something that is one thing. (avoiding) but they are forcing us to act to move and preform for their own benefit without pay. Forcing us to provide information instead of investigating them selves. Basically we testify every time we go register. Now who else has to testify. Isn’t that in the constitution. Were is our right to remain silent. Maybe im ranting and y’all know the answers to these already and im late on this boat.
man this was bad. I couldn’t even finish the rest at the end because just wow ! He couldn’t tell other punitive effects the registry causes ? It’s practically like reciting the pledge of allegiance at this point after so many years. I even think the judges knew and was trying to subtly help him by prompting him to tell them in his own words…. but they know.
This is what angers me. An important case down the drain because the plaintiff picked out some unprepared average Joe schmoe. I’ve seen better performances from public defenders in a lower state court with cases that are not so important. If those briefs filed don’t help us, then it’ll take some miracle. We shall see – but not hopeful.
” He couldn’t tell other punitive effects the registry causes ? ”
I know John, and to think that would of been the easy part. It almost seems like he didn’t even meet his client or doesn’t even know him. It’s like he walked into some random court room to some random case.
On the basis of these reviews alone, from those who have taken time to listen, Millard is lost.
Judges have to consider the arguments put before them. And Supreme Court statistically is not likely to take this up unless there is an appellate victory on the same issues in a different circuit. Such as the 11th, where FAC lawyers have filed the Ex Post Facto Plus challenge. Which will now be more of a, ahem, challenge, after the likely outcome of Millard.
That is the ripple effect of selecting the wrong lawyer for oral arguments in federal appeals court, or if not preparing for them properly.
FAC, someone, prove me wrong, cheer me up!
This is exactly the danger of coming into court unprepared or out of your league. You run the risk of creating bad precedent.
We strongly discourage members from filing pro se lawsuits to challenge these things because if you mess them up, you mess it up for anyone that comes after you.
well said, FAC.
I agree. Well said.
It’s like 904,000 people retained the same idiot lawyer without even realizing it.
yeah i just did in a reply a little further down. 🙂 I feel your pain though!
Im not so sure her closing statements seemed to let the cat out the bag (finial 5 minutes)
Just fyi in case anyone is curious, this is from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth District in Denver, Co. Case 17-1333.