Kyle Hurst v. United States Forest Service – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Kyle Hurst Challenges Rainbow Family Immunity Ruling

The question presented in the petition is:

Whether the Eleventh Circuit wrongfully absolved Respondent of liability when it determined that Moore Lake was not an “area” where a fee was charged, or a part of an area used for commercial purposes.  Read the Petition here: Hurst Petition

The Rainbow Family has long history of violating the laws

Equally important, the Permit for the Rainbow Group covered “3 square miles”. 4 Since the distance to Moore Lake and Silver Lake is less than 1 nautical mile, the holding in Goodman means that the properties are the same “area” and the Permit covered activity at both Silver Lake and Moore Lake. The Eleventh Circuit failed to correctly apply Goodman for the following reasons:

1. A “fee” is charged for access to Silver Lake;
2. Moore Lake and Silver Lake are less than 1 mile apart;
3. Both Moore Lake and Silver Lake are covered by the plain language of the Permit, stating that activity of Rainbow Family is permitted up to “3 square miles” from Moore Lake.

The holding in Goodman means that USFS cannot avoid liability and the Eleventh Circuit opinion incorrectly interpreted federal law. The Court of Appeal’s decision strays from the factual issues in the case. The facts are clear that Moore Lake is a part of Silver Lake. Moore Lake is the camping compliment to Silver Lake.

 

Contact Robert Sirianni and Brownstone Law to discuss your Supreme Court Appeal.

source https://www.brownstonelaw.com/kyle-hurst-v-united-states-forest-service-petition-for-writ-of-certiorari/

Brownstone Law Files Petition to United States Supreme Court

Jackson v. United States Petition for Writ of Certiorari

The Sixth Circuit’s decision in Ruelas v. Wolfenbarger, 580 F.3d 403 (6th Cir. 2009) acknowledged that this court’s seminal decision in Fry v. Pliler, 551 U.S. 112 (2007) did not overule Mitchell v. Esparza, 540 U.S. 12 (2003) (per curiam). In Ruelas, the Sixth Circuit held that a federal habeas court is free to apply the Esparza harmless error standard to determine whether a state court of appeals reasonably applied the Chapman harmless error standard on direct review. In the decision below, infra, App. 3a, the court of Appeals applied this standard. However, the Kentucky Supreme Court did not apply the Chapman harmless error standard on direct review.

Brownstone Law Petitions U.S. Supreme Court

Read more about the Petition here:  Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

This case presents the following questions:

 

1. Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in applying the Esparza harmless error standard, instead of the Brecht harmless error standard on federal habeas review, when the state court failed to apply Chapman on direct review.

 

2. Whether a trial court’s erroneous denial of a request for a self-protection instruction as to the lesser included offenses of second-degree manslaughter and reckless homicide may be deemed harmless.

Contact Robert Sirianni to discuss more about your appeal.

source https://www.brownstonelaw.com/brownstone-law-files-petition-to-united-states-supreme-court/