In this episode, we discussed a recent case U.S. v. Seekins, in which the federal public defender attempted to push the Fifth Circuit to revisit the scope of interstate commerce in the criminal justice context. By a close vote (7-9), the Fifth Circuit refused to open this door. However, Justice Ho, in his dissenting opinion, laid out a blueprint for the defendant to get the the Supreme Court's attention. Will this case be the case for the conservative Supreme Court to cut back on the scope of interstate commerce? Joel Page, the federal defender who prepared and argued this case, offered his thoughts in this episode. 

Host: Leo Yu (SMU Law)
Guest: Joel Page (Appellate Chief of the Federal Public Defender's Office (NDTX))

In Shepperd v. United States, an attorney represented his client, the criminal defendant, and also the government's key witness at the same time. Two weeks before trial, this conflict of interest was finally made known to the defendant, who immediately obtained new counsel. The new counsel informed the trial court about the conflict and requested a continuance of the trial. The trial court, however, held that the trial must proceed as planned. The defendant got 30 years from the trial. 

The case got appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Justice Willett, writing for the Court, was rather assumed by this clear conflict of interest. He actually wrote "Oops." as his reaction in this opinion. Nevertheless, the Court refused to vacate the verdict, but remanded the case back to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing. 

Host: Prof. Leo Yu, SMU School of Law 
Guest: Prof. Pamela Metzger, SMU School of Law, Director of the Deason Criminal Justice Reform Center 

Can a police officer search a criminal suspect's cell phone in full, when the only charge in the warrant was drug possession, and the affidavit provided barebone justification? This is the question the Fifth Circuit was presented in U.S. v. Morton. The Morton case presents an issue that is not fully resolved by the Supreme Court - what kind of protection a cell phone deserves under the Fourth Amendment? Treat it like a person's home? Or, more than a home?

We have the privilege to have two guest attorneys who are directly involved in this case to share some insights: Brandon Beck from the Federal Public Defender's Office, who argued this case at the Fifth Circuit, and Aisha Dennis from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.