Cases compared
Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios v. Vernon Liggins vs. John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson vs. Darrell Alan Thompson v. United States
No. 25-1223No. 26-5851No. 26-5894
Side by side
| Fact | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al. | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police Department | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.25-1223 | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police Department26-5851 | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United States26-5894 |
| Status | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.Before Arguments | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police DepartmentBefore Arguments | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United StatesBefore Arguments |
| Date | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.Argued Jan 11, 2027 | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police DepartmentOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United StatesOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) |
| Question presented | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.Whether, under EAJA, "any civil action" encompasses an action seeking a writ of habeas corpus to challenge civil immigration detention? | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police Department1. Whether the rule that a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 accrues on the date a nolle prosequi is entered, as the 2 nd Circuit Court's decision in Spak v. Phillips, 857 F.3d 458 (2d Cir. 2017), was applied by the panel below, survives Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. 36 (2022), which held that such a claim accrues only when the underlying criminal proceeding has been disposed of in a manner that “ cannot be revived. ”? 2. Whether, under Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), a federal court may apply a claim-accrual rule for the state-law tort underlying a § 1983 malicious-prosecution claim that conflicts with the accrual rule the State itself has enacted, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-577f, and confirmed through its appellate courts, Lopes v. Farmer, 286 Conn. 384 (2008), and Washington v. Ivancic, 113 Conn. App. 131 (2009). 3. Whether the court of appeals committed reversible error by affirming dismissal of Petitioner's claims as time-barred without addressing the tolling provision of 11 U.S.C. § 108(a), where Petitioner's claims were property of a bankruptcy estate, subject to an automatic stay, and were not abandoned back to him until the bankruptcy court's order of August 1, 2021 — a dispositive, squarely presented question of federal statutory law that the panel's summary order does not address. 4. Whether an officer's arrest warrant application can establish probable cause for larceny as a matter of law where the application accounts only for the income a property manager received from the property, with no accounting for the correlative business expenses the officer knew the manager was responsible for paying, and where an accounting of those expenses was independently available in the municipal Assessment records but the officer failed to review it. | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United States1. Whether, when a defendant pleads guilty to an indictment and plea agreement that omit the Armed Career Criminal Act’s occasions element, and the district court then imposes an enhanced sentence based on its own finding that the prior offenses were committed on different occasions, the harmlessness of the resulting Erlinger error is measured by asking whether the defendant would have pleaded guilty anyway, as the Fourth Circuit holds; by asking whether a rational jury would necessarily have found the occasions element, as other circuits hold; or by asking whether the error affected the sentence imposed. 2. Whether a plea-agreement provision waiving the right to have “the existence and applicability of any prior convictions” charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt waives the distinct right recognized in Erlinger to have a jury determine whether prior offenses were committed on different occasions—particularly where the same plea agreement fixes the defendant’s total sentencing exposure below the enhanced statutory range. |
| Summary | Kevin Isaac Montoya Palacios, Petitioner v. Vernon Liggins, Acting Field Office Director, Baltimore, Maryland, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.This case asks whether a person who wins a habeas corpus challenge to civil immigration detention may recover attorney’s fees and costs from the federal government under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The Court will decide whether such a habeas case counts as a “civil action” under that law. | John Alan Sakon v. John Johnson, Officer of the Glastonbury Police DepartmentJohn Alan Sakon asks the Supreme Court to review the Second Circuit’s decision upholding dismissal of his claims as too late. He argues that the courts misapplied rules for when his claim over an allegedly wrongful prosecution could be filed and bankruptcy protections, and that an officer’s warrant application did not give enough grounds for a larceny charge; his petition is pending. | Darrell Alan Thompson v. United StatesDarrell Alan Thompson asks the Supreme Court to review his enhanced sentence, imposed after a judge found his prior offenses happened on separate occasions. He disputes how to decide whether the judge’s finding without a jury was harmless (did not affect the result), and whether his plea agreement gave up his right to have a jury decide that issue. |
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.