Cases compared
Eric Gomez, Petitioner v. David Saccoccio vs. Jonathan Granado, Petitioner v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez vs. Kenneth Robert Simpson v. United States
Criminal Procedure cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
No. 25-1314No. 25-1338No. 25-7045
Side by side
| Fact | Eric Gomez, Petitioner v. David Saccoccio | Jonathan Granado, Petitioner v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez | Kenneth Robert Simpson v. United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | 25-1314 | 25-1338 | 25-7045 |
| Status | Before Arguments | Before Arguments | Dismissed |
| Date | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) |
| Question presented | Whether combining general principles from two factually dissimilar cases conflicts with this Court’s precedents requiring lower courts to define rights with specificity and use close factual analogues in determining whether a Fourth Amendment constitutional right is clearly established. | 1. Whether Officer Jonathan Granado’s use of deadly force on September 3, 2021 violated the Fourth Amendment when, after a high-speed chase, Estevan Ramirez emerged from the vehicle with gun in hand, refused an order to “get on the ground,” physically resisted an officer’s attempt to arrest, and attempted to escape towards the darkness of a residential neighborhood with gun still in hand. a. Did the panel correctly set forth the elements of an excessive force claim? b. Did the panel invert the qualified immunity analysis by shifting the burden from Ramirez to Officer Granado? c. Does the panel’s approach to qualified immunity force officers “to play roulette with their own existence”? 2. Whether any court other than the Supreme Court can clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity, and if so, whether the panel majority correctly identified the clearly established law applicable to this case. 3. Whether this Court should resolve the controversies regarding qualified imm. | 1. Whether a Constitutional challenge to the imposition of a new sentence on revocation constitutes, an “improperly raised collateral attack” on the underlying conviction and sentence? 2. Whether the district court relied on impermissible factors in revoking Mr. Simpson’s Supervised Release term, sentencing him , and imposing a new term of supervised release? |
| Summary | Officer Eric Gomez asks the Supreme Court to review a Ninth Circuit ruling that allowed David Saccoccio’s Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim to proceed after Gomez struck him with a less-lethal foam-projectile round while Saccoccio was fleeing, climbing a fence into a private yard, and violating a curfew. The dispute concerns whether Gomez was entitled to qualified immunity because the law allegedly did not clearly establish that his conduct was unconstitutional. | This case concerns whether Officer Jonathan Granado is liable under the Fourth Amendment for using deadly force against Estevan Ramirez after a vehicle pursuit and confrontation in which Ramirez allegedly had a gun. Granado asks the Supreme Court to review the Fifth Circuit’s denial of qualified immunity and its analysis of excessive force and clearly established law. | Kenneth Robert Simpson petitioned the Supreme Court after the Eighth Circuit upheld the revocation of his supervised release, a new sentence, and a new term of supervised release. He argues that the lower courts wrongly treated his constitutional challenge as an improper collateral attack on his original conviction and relied on impermissible factors when revoking and sentencing him. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Criminal Procedure
- Why compared
- Reviewed Criminal Procedure tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.