Miller & Chevalier's Supreme Court and Appellate Group has handled matters in a wide range of substantive areas, including federal and state taxation, employee benefits/ERISA, government contracts, and federal preemption.  Our lawyers collectively have argued 30 cases before the Supreme Court, and many more in the courts of appeals, representing corporations, trade associations, individuals, and public interest organizations.  Our experience includes handling Supreme Court merits briefs and oral arguments, petitions for certiorari, briefs in opposition to certiorari, and amicus briefs, as well as complex civil and criminal appeals before all federal circuit courts of appeals and a number of state appellate tribunals.  On three different occasions, we have persuaded a court of appeals to reverse an unfavorable trial court decision and then persuaded the Supreme Court to deny certiorari when the United States sought Supreme Court review.

We have provided not only exclusive full-scale representation with briefing and argument in the Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals, but also advisory litigation services, including providing strategic guidance at the early stages of a case by shaping important statutory or constitutional issues with an eye to subsequent appellate consideration.  In addition, we have been engaged to revise appellate briefs prepared initially by other counsel and to provide expert advice on Supreme Court or appellate strategy and procedure in important cases. 

Appellate advocacy is itself an area of specialization that places a premium on written and oral advocacy skills that not all substantive experts can offer.  Appellate judges are generalists.  Experienced appellate advocates can translate highly technical subject matter into language and concepts that a non-specialist can understand.  Our attorneys have developed these skills in some of the most complex areas of the law, such as tax and ERISA litigation.  Moreover, because an appeal is framed by the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law, the issues may differ significantly from the ones that trial counsel thought they were litigating.  Our appellate experts, unburdened by the history and emotions of the trial, are particularly effective in approaching the issues with the same fresh perspective that appellate judges themselves bring to the case.

We can add value to a case at its earliest stages when timely consideration of sophisticated appellate strategy can significantly improve the client's overall prospects for litigation success.  Therefore, we are often consulted early in the litigation to provide strategic advice on potential issues for appeal in an important case, preparation or review of summary judgment briefs or other legal memoranda submitted to the trial court, as well as advice on appellate strategy following a trial court decision.  That consultative role at the early stages of litigation can make the representation much more efficient when the case reaches the appellate court.

For more detailed information on our Supreme Court and Appellate Group and to see examples of our work, please click on the following links:

Recent and Representative Engagements

Other Reported M&C Cases

Other Reported Cases by M&C Attorneys

Recent and Other Representative Engagements

Supreme Court

Court of Appeals

• Brubaker v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 482 F.3d 586 (D.C. Cir. 2007).  Representation of MetLife in the D.C. Circuit defending a favorable district court decision that rejected a former employee's attempt to obtain benefits that MetLife intended to grant only to MetLife retirees.
• Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ill. v. Cruz, 396 F.3d 793 (7th Cir. 2005), vacated and remanded, No 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4896 (U.S., June 26, 2006), on remand, 495 F.3d 510 (7th Cir. 2007).  Representation of federal employee health insurer on question of federal question jurisdiction over FEHBA suits involving subrogation.
• Long Term Care Partners, LLC v. United States, No. 06-1930 (4th Cir.) (pending).  Representation of long-term care insurer (a joint venture of MetLife and John Hancock) on issue of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) jurisdiction to review denials of insurability with respect to long-term care insurance for federal employees.
• Houston Community Hosp. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas, 481 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 2007). Representation of federal health insurer on issue whether official immunity bars state law misrepresentation claims against FEHBA carriers.
• Anesthesiology Assocs. of Tallahassee, Inc. v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 133 Fed. Appx. 738, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 13711 (11th Cir. Mar. 18, 2005).  Representation of Blue Cross and Blue Shield plan in a case involving removal jurisdiction over ERISA and FEHBA plans.
• Robinson v. United States, 335 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (executive compensation deduction), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1105 (2004).  Representation of the controlling shareholder of a film company in persuading the Federal Circuit to reverse an unfavorable decision on an executive compensation issue and then successfully opposing the government's petition for certiorari.
• Botsford v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mont., Inc., 314 F.3d 390 (9th Cir. 2002).  Representation of federal employee health insurer on issue of whether FEHBA preempts enrollee tort suits challenging health benefits denials.
• Exxon Corp. v. United States, 88 F.3d 968 (Fed. Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1119 (1997).  Representation of Exxon Corporation in persuading the Federal Circuit to reverse the government's victory in the Court of Federal Claims in a corporate tax case involving natural gas depletion and then successfully opposing the government's petition for certiorari.
• Weyerhaeuser Co. v. United States, 92 F.3d 1148 (Fed. Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1091 (1997).  Representation of Weyerhaeuser Corporation in persuading the Federal Circuit to reverse the government's victory in the Court of Federal Claims in a corporate tax case involving casualty loss deductions and then successfully opposing the government's petition for certiorari.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Commissioner, 71 F.3d 209 (6th Cir. 1995).  Representation of taxpayer on issue of the current deductibility of its structured tort settlement liability.

Other Reported and Pending Appellate Cases Handled by Miller & Chevalier's Appellate Litigation Group

Supreme Court

• Research in Motion, Ltd. v. NTP, Inc., 546 U.S. 1157 (2006) (amicus brief for Government of Canada in support of petition in the BlackBerry patent infringement suit, which involved the scope of extraterritorial application of U.S. patent laws).
• F. Hoffman-Laroche v. Empagran, S.A., 542 U.S. 155 (2003) (extraterritorial application of Sherman Antitrust Act) (amicus brief for Government of Canada).
• Dee-K Enterprises, Inc. v. Heveafil Sdn. Bhd., cert. denied, 539 U.S. 969 (2003) (standard for proving Sherman Antitrust Act liability for mixed U.S.-foreign cartel).
• FATA Aluminum, Inc. v. Vulcan Engineering Co., cert. denied, 537 U.S. 814 (2002) (criteria for "obviousness" determination in patent litigation).
• Boeing Co. v. United States, 537 U.S. 437 (2003) (assist in briefing on the merits of research and development tax credit issue).
• Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765 (2000) (constitutionality of qui tam litigation) (amicus brief).
• Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (1999) (implied and express preemption issues) (amicus brief).
• Commissioner v. Texaco Inc., cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1185 (1996) (amicus brief in opposition to U.S. cert. petition on issue of reallocating income under 26 U.S.C. § 482).
• Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939 (1996) (amicus brief for Chamber of Commerce and others on issue of liability for non-financial frauds under the False Claims Act).
• Winstar v. United States, 518 U.S. 839 (1996) (ability to sue government for broken promise concerning accounting treatment of thrifts) (amicus brief).
• Melendez v. United States, 518 U.S. 120 (1996) (limitation on court's sentencing discretion) (amicus brief).
• Planning Research Corp. v. United States ex rel. Schwedt, cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1068 (1996) (definition of "claim" under the False Claims Act) (amicus brief).
• Ashland Inc. v. Kentucky Revenue Cabinet, No. 94-1661, cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1103 (1995) (preparation of a petition for certiorari for Ashland Oil challenging the constitutionality of Kentucky's application of its use tax to leased property).
• Barclays Bank PLC v. Franchise Tax Board of California, 512 U.S. 298 (1993) (constitutionality of waters' edge taxation) (amicus brief).
• Boeing Co. v. United States ex rel. Kelly, cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1140 (1993) (constitutionality of qui tam provisions of False Claims Act) (amicus brief).
• California Housing Securities v. United States, cert. denied, 506 U.S. 916 (1992) (takings claim).
• Madison Cablevision, Inc. v. City of Morganton, 503 U.S. 985 (1992) (assisting in brief in opposition defending a municipality's decision to deny a franchise to a cable TV operator).
• Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Fla. Dept. of Revenue, 500 U.S. 172 (1991) (representation on the merits of lender on challenge to state intangible property tax, but the case was affirmed by an equally divided Court).
• Lion Uniform, Inc. v. NLRB, cert. denied, 498 U.S. 992 (1990) (agency authority to determine what is "substantially justified" under EAJA).

Court of Appeals

• Blue Cross and Blue Shield Health Care Plan of Georgia, Inc. v. Gunter, No. 07-10956-EE (11th Cir.) (whether federal courts have federal question jurisdiction over Federal Employees Health Benefits Act reimbursement claims).
• Barrick Resources, Inc. v. United States, No. 07-4046 (10th Cir.) (disallowance of net operating loss on procedural grounds).
• United States v. Munoz-Franco, 487 F.3d 25 (1st  Cir. 2007) (bank fraud conviction).
• Centex v. United States, 486 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (claim for attorneys' fees based on bad faith conduct).
• ExxonMobil Corp. v. Commissioner, 484 F.3d 731 (5th Cir. 2007) (calculation of interest due on tax refunds).
• Doe v. Kamehameha Schools/Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate, 295 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (D. Hawaii 2003), remanded, 416 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 2005), rehearing en banc granted, 441 F.3d 1029 (9th Cir. 2006), aff'd en banc, 470 F.3d 827 (9th Cir. 2006) (assisted in defending the admissions policy of Kamehameha Schools, the largest private secondary school in the world).
• Fed. Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. United States, 463 F.3d 968 (Fed. Cir. 2006), petition for cert. pending, No. 06-1250 (applicability of statute of limitations).
• Black & Decker Corp. v. United States, 340 F. Supp. 2d 621 (D. Md. 2004), aff'd in part, rev'd in part and remanded, 436 F.3d 431 (4th Cir. 2006) (affirming taxpayer's arguments on statutory treatment of contingent liability transaction; remanding for determination of whether the transaction had economic substance).
• Long-Term Capital v. United States, 150 Fed. Appx. 40 (2d Cir. Sept. 27, 2005) (imposition of penalties for alleged tax shelter).
• Capital Blue Cross v. Commissioner, 431 F.3d 117 (3d Cir. 2005) (tax consequences of termination of health insurance contracts) (amicus brief).
• First Heights Bank, FSB v. United States, 422 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (breach of contract damages awarded because federal legislation interfered with promises made in connection with purchase of failed thrifts).
• Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. United States, 379 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (availability of interest netting remedy in light of sovereign immunity).
• General Electric Co. v. United States, 384 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (calculation of interest due on tax refunds).
• Fla. Power & Light Co. v. United States, 375 F.3d 1119 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (federal highway excise tax issue).
• Clajon Gas Co. v. Commissioner, 354 F.3d 786 (8th Cir. 2004) (determination of depreciation class life) (amicus brief).
• Cain v. United States, 350 F.3d 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (liability of United States to investors in failed savings and loan).
• Saginaw Bay Pipeline Co. v. United States, 338 F.3d 600 (6th Cir. 2003) (determination of depreciation class life) (amicus brief).
• Shell Oil Co. v. United States, 319 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (application of collateral estoppel to Sec. 29 tax credit dispute).
• Allegheny Teledyne Inc. v. United States, 316 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (pension cost obligation of government contractor in the event of segment closing).
• Dee-K Enterprises, Inc. v. Heveafil Sdn. Bhd., 299 F.3d 281 (4th Cir. 2002) (standard for proving Sherman Antitrust Act liability for mixed U.S.-foreign cartel).
• Chevron USA, Inc. v. Mobil Producing Texas and New Mexico, 281 F.3d 1249 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (assisting in a case involving the effect of a DOE consent order on a claim for contribution).
• Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States, 271 F.3d 1060 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (damages for government breach of contract to launch satellites).
• Host Marriott Corp. v. United States, 267 F.3d 363 (4th Cir. 2001) (eligibility of interest for special 10-year carryback rule).
• Exxon Corp. v. United States, 244 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (application of fixed-contract exception to repeal of gas depletion allowance).
• Porter v. Ogden, Newell & Welch, 241 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2001) (reversing dismissal of malpractice claim as premature).
• Lockheed Martin Corp. v. United States, 210 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (research tax credit for fixed-price contractors) (amicus brief).
• AUSA Life Ins. Co. v. Ernst & Young, 206 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2000) (standard for loss causation in securities suit by institutional investors) (amicus brief for American Council of Life Insurance).
• Amoco Corp. v. Commissioner, 138 F.3d 1139 (7th Cir. 1998) (foreign tax credit).
• Kaiser Aero. & Elecs. Corp. v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., No. 96-2117, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 35509 (4th Cir. Dec. 17, 1997) (scope of government subcontract).
• Fairchild Industries v. United States, 71 F.3d 868 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (amicus brief on behalf of the Aerospace Industries Association successfully arguing that government contractors are entitled to a tax credit for research expenditures incurred in connection with a fixed-price contract).
• Texaco Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Dept. of Consumer Affairs, 60 F.3d 867 (1st Cir. 1995) (rejecting Puerto Rico's claim for hundreds of millions of dollars in alleged overcharges by a gasoline wholesaler).
• MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. FCC, 59 F.3d 1407 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (challenge to FCC authority to impose certain offsets).
• Bell Atlantic Tel. Cos. v. FCC, 24 F.3d 1441 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (invalidating FCC order as effecting an unlawful taking of property).
• New Eng. Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCC, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19425 (D.C. Cir. May 4, 1994) (order lifting stay pending review).
• In re DOE Stripper Well Exemption Litigation, 945 F.2d 1575 (TECA 1991) (federal courts lacked jurisdiction to enjoin Alaska from taxing certain benefits received by oil companies from a settlement).

Some Other Reported Appellate Cases Handled by Current Members of Miller & Chevalier's Appellate Litigation Group

Supreme Court

• Whorton v. Bockting, 127 S. Ct. 1173 (2007) (amicus brief on behalf of, inter alia, group of former federal judges on when federal statutes permitted the retroactive application of new rules of constitutional law).
• Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006) (represented Petitioner in Fourth Amendment case concerning application of exclusionary rule where home entry occurred without knocking and announcing).
• Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006) (amicus brief filed at certiorari and merits stages regarding testimonial nature, for Sixth Amendment purposes, of witness statements made during a telephone call to police 911 operators).
• Hammon v. Indiana, 547 U.S. 813 (2006) (amicus brief filed at certiorari and merits stages regarding testimonial nature, for Sixth Amendment purposes, of witness statements made to investigating police officers).
• Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426  (2004) (amicus brief filed on jurisdiction of United States Courts under federal statutes to hear habeas corpus cases brought by persons physically outside of the judicial district).
• Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749 (2003) (represented Petitioner in a case involving the difference between a federal civil rights case and a federal habeas corpus case).
• Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (represented Petitioner in a case involving what constitutes a "second" habeas corpus petition under federal statute).
• United States v. Energy Resources, Inc., 495 U.S. 545 (1990) (power of Chapter 11 debtor to designate payments so as to minimize responsible officers' withholding tax liability).
• United States v. Goodyear, 493 U.S. 132 (1989) (computation of foreign tax credit where certain losses are deductible under foreign, but not U.S. law).
• United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554 (1989) (court's power to grant conditional enforcement of IRS summons; standard of proof of crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege claim).
• Commissioner v. Clark, 489 U.S. 726 (1989) (circumstances under which boot is taxed as a dividend in certain reorganizations).
• United States v. Stuart, 489 U.S. 353 (1989) (standard for issuing summons requested by foreign tax treaty partner).
• U.S. Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, Inc., 487 U.S. 72 (1988) (ability to litigate on appeal of contempt judgment the plaintiff's standing to bring underlying action).
• Commissioner v. Bollinger, 485 U.S. 340 (1988) (whether dummy corporation set up to avoid state usury laws must be recognized as separate taxable entity).
• Arkansas Best Corp. v. Commissioner, 485 U.S. 212 (1988) (validity of Corn Products doctrine -- whether stock acquired for business purpose can be treated as capital asset).
• Commissioner v. Fink, 483 U.S. 89 (1987) (whether surrender of a small portion of a dominant shareholder's shares gives rise to an immediately deductible loss).
• United States v. General Dynamics Corp., 481 U.S. 239 (1987) ("all events test" as applied to estimation of future employee health benefit claims against self-insurer).
• Jersey Shore State Bank v. United States, 479 U.S. 442 (1987) (existence of notice requirement for Section 3505 third-party lender liability for unpaid withholding taxes).
• Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) (Fourth Amendment challenge to EPA overflights of industrial facility).
• United States v. Von Neumann, 474 U.S. 242 (1986) (Fifth Amendment challenge to rescission procedure in civil forfeiture of smuggled goods).
• Johnson v. City of Baltimore, 472 U.S. 353 (1985) (compliance of Baltimore mandatory retirement plan for firefighters with ADEA).
• INS v. Rios-Pineda, 471 U.S. 444 (1985) (standard for reopening deportation proceedings).
• First Nat'l Bank of Atlanta v. Bartow Cty. Board of Tax Assessors, 470 U.S. 583 (1985) (legality of Georgia bank shares tax, which takes into account federal obligations held by bank) (argued for the United States as amicus).
• United States v. Johns, 469 U.S. 478 (1985) (Fourth Amendment -- delayed warrantless search of vehicle).
• Wasman v. United States, 468 U.S. 559 (1984) (due process challenge to resentencing at second trial to higher sentence based on intervening conviction).
• Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288 (1984) (First Amendment challenge to prohibition against demonstrators sleeping in Lafayette Park).
• Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984) (whether Fourth Amendment protections apply in "open fields" of private property).
• Donovan v. Lone Steer, Inc., 464 U.S. 408 (1984) (constitutionality of agency subpoena for company records).
• United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1983) (Fourth Amendment -- legality of detention of airline passenger's luggage on suspicion that it contains narcotics).
• Morrison-Knudsen Constr. Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation, 461 U.S. 624 (1983) (Longshoreman's Act -- whether employer contributions to union trust funds are "wages" under LHWCA).
• United States v. Security Industrial Bank, 459 U.S. 70 (1982) (Fifth Amendment claim that retroactive application of Section 522(f) of Bankruptcy Code (destroying the value of certain blanket security interests in household goods) is a taking).
• Northern Pipeline Constr. Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50 (1982) (constitutionality of Article I bankruptcy courts established by the Bankruptcy Act of 1978).
• United States v. MacDonald, 456 U.S. 1 (1982) (whether delay between dismissal of murder charges against a Green Beret and his subsequent indictment violated Speedy Trial Clause).
• United States v. Clark, 454 U.S. 555 (1982) (interpretation of civil service pay statute).
• Middlesex Cty. Sewerage Authority v. Nat'l Sea Clammers Ass'n, 453 U.S. 1 (1981) (existence of various remedies for water pollution, such as private right of action under Clean Water Act or federal common law action for nuisance).
• Monroe v. Standard Oil Co., 452 U.S. 549 (1981) (extent to which employer must accommodate reservist's obligation to attend weekend military duty).
• Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490 (1981) (whether there was a "material misrepresentation" that justified denaturalization of a Nazi war criminal).
• Thomas v. Washington Gas Light Co., 448 U.S. 261 (1980) (application of Full Faith and Credit Clause where different states make successive workers' compensation awards).
• Coffy v. Republic Steel Corp., 447 U.S. 191 (1980) (whether supplemental unemployment benefits are a "perquisite of seniority" that must be credited to veterans for their military service).

United States Courts of Appeals

• Singletary v. Reilly, 452 F.3d 868 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (use of double and triple hearsay at parole proceedings).
• Johnson v. Quander, 440 F.3d 489 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (civil rights case involving the use of forced blood sampling).
• Fletcher v. Reilly, 433 F.3d 867 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (whether Ex Post Facto Clause permits retroactive application of federal parole statutes).
• Ash v. Reilly, 431 F.3d 826 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (use of hearsay at parole proceedings).
  " Nicholas v. Goord, 430 F.3d 652 (2d Cir. 2005) (amicus brief regarding forced blood sampling).
• Fletcher v. District of Columbia, 391 F.3d 250 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (rehearing only) (civil rights case involving retroactive application of federal parole statutes).
• United States v. Kincade, 379 F.3d 813 (9th Cir. 2004) (amicus brief regarding forced blood sampling).
• Stokes v. United States Parole Comm'n, 374 F.3d 1235 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (whether federal statutes permit federal district courts to hear habeas corpus cases brought by persons physically outside of the judicial district).
• Padilla v. Rumsfeld, 352 F.3d 695 (2d Cir. 2004) (amicus brief regarding whether federal statutes permit federal district courts to hear habeas corpus cases brought by persons physically outside of the judicial district).
• United States v. Dawson, 193 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 1999) (standard for waiver of right to jury trial).
• United States v. Comito, 177 F.3d 1166 (9th Cir. 1999) (use of hearsay evidence during parole proceedings).

Highest State Courts

• Preacher v. United States, 934 A.2d 363 (D.C. 2007) (duty of trial courts to answer notes from the jury).
• Brown v. United States, 881 A.2d 586 (D.C. 2004) (effect of absence of evidence on burden of proof).
• Moorer v. United States, 868 A.2d 137 (D.C. 2004) (lesser included offenses).
  " United States v. Crockett, 861 A.2d 604 (D.C. 2004) (whether a statutory basis exists for persons outside of the District of Columbia to seek relief in District of Columbia courts for violations of District of Columbia law).
• Outlaw v. United States, 854 A.2d 169 (D.C. 2004) (propriety of ex parte communications by factfinder).
• Smith v. United States, 847 A.2d 1159 (D.C. 2004) (retroactive application of District of Columbia statute regarding jury trials).
• Austin v. United States, 847 A.2d 391 (D.C. 2004) (whether District of Columbia gun restrictions comply with the Second Amendment).
• Moore v. United States, 846 A.2d 302 (D.C. 2004) (belated disclosure of exculpatory evidence).
• Woodall v. United States, 842 A.2d 690 (D.C. 2003) (use of party admissions at trial).
• Ebron v. United States, 838 A.2d 1140 (D.C. 2003) (consideration by jury of extraneous factors during trial).
• In re Public Defender Serv., 831 A.2d 890 (D.C. 2003) (application of crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege).
• In re J.O.R., 820 A.2d 546 (D.C. 2003) (scope of the search-incident-to-arrest exception in juvenile cases).
• Benton v. United States, 815 A.2d 371 (D.C. 2003) (duty of government to disclose serial perjury by one of its police officers).
• Plummer v. United States, 813 A.2d 182 (D.C. 2002) (scope of permissible closing argument).
• Williams v. United States, 783 A.2d 598 (D.C. 2001) (en banc) (right to counsel during post-conviction proceedings).
• In re M.N.T., 776 A.2d 1201 (D.C. 2001) (use of victim impact statements during juvenile trials).
• Childs v. United States, 760 A.2d 614 (D.C. 2000) (application of Double Jeopardy Clause where jury convicts of some elements of offense but not others).
• State v. Raines, 383 Md. 1 (Md. 2004) (amicus brief regarding forced blood sampling).
• Barrios-Lomeli v. State, 961 P.2d 750 (Nev. 1998) (state constitutional search and seizure requirements).
• Lane v. State, 956 P.2d 88 (Nev. 1998) (capital case jury instructions).
• Hill v. State, 953 P.2d 1077 (Nev. 1998) (whether application of death penalty to persons with mental retardation violates the Eighth Amendment).
• Geary v. State, 952 P.2d 431 (Nev. 1998) (capital case jury instructions).
• Jaeger v. State, 948 P.2d 1185 (Nev. 1997) (constitutional right to subpoena and present evidence).
• Barrios-Lomeli v. State, 944 P.2d 791 (Nev. 1997) (state constitutional search and seizure rights).
• Colon v. State, 938 P.2d 714 (Nev. 1997) (procuring agent defense).
• Powell v. State, 930 P.2d 1123 (Nev. 1997) (right to speedy determination of probable cause and remedy for its violation).
• Geary v. State, 930 P.2d 719 (Nev. 1996) (jury instructions in capital cases).
• Miller v. Warden, 921 P.2d 882 (Nev. 1996) (Ex Post Facto Clause application to state statute changing definition of punishment).
• Mazzan v. Warden, 921 P.2d 920 (Nev. 1996) (whether procedural rules prevented consideration of merits of claims brought by arguably innocent capital defendant).
• Greenwood v. State, 915 P.2d 258 (Nev. 1996) (whether trial court could impose sentence based on acquitted conduct).
• Phipps v. State, 903 P.2d 820 (Nev. 1995) (use of invalid prior conviction to increase sentence).

State Intermediate Appellate Courts

• Lehto v. Allstate Ins. Co., 36 Cal. Rptr. 2d 814 (Cal. App. 1994) (overturning multi-million dollar jury verdict against insurer because insurer's conduct did not constitute bad faith as a matter of law).
• Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Superior Court, 13 Cal. Rptr. 2d 449 (Cal. App. 1992) (granting peremptory writ ordering trial judge to honor insurer's peremptory challenge in group of coordinated cases).