News Center

Elsewhere Online twitter Facebook SLS Blogs YouTube SLS Channel Linked In SLSNavigator SLS on Flickr

Cone v. Bell Reply Brief

Publication Date: 
December 01, 2008
Thomas Goldstein

In a posting in SCOTUSBlog, Lecturer in Law Thomas C. Goldstein credits the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic for preparing a brief in Cone v. Bell:

Today we’re filing our merits reply brief in Cone v. Bell, which I’ll argue next Tuesday. The case involves a question of procedural default on habeas corpus and a claim under Brady v. Maryland. The other briefs in the case — including the State’s merits brief — are available over at SCOTUSwiki. The Stanford Law School clinic team members are Ruthie Zemel, Jessica Oats, and David Muraskin. Our co-counsel Paul Bottei also worked closely with us.