Appellate Jurisdiction in Sanchez-Gomez: A Hard Case that Should Be Easy

96 Washington University Law Review Online 1 (2018)

10 Pages Posted: 3 May 2018 Last revised: 23 May 2019

See all articles by Bryan Lammon

Bryan Lammon

University of Toledo - College of Law

Date Written: April 9, 2018

Abstract

In United States v. Sanchez-Gomez, the Supreme Court will decide whether the Ninth Circuit had jurisdiction to strike down a district court rule requiring that all criminal defendants be shackled in full restraints for most non-jury proceedings. As the Court and the parties have approached Sanchez-Gomez, it’s a hard case. It presents difficult and unresolved issues about the meaning and application of two major aspects of federal appellate jurisdiction: the collateral-order doctrine and appellate mandamus. But Sanchez-Gomez should be easy. It’s what I call a “one-shot” interlocutory appeal—it presents a relatively abstract issue of law that, once resolved, will resolve the issue for all litigants and will not require any future appeals on case-specific applications of the law. The lower risk of increasing appellate caseloads, coupled with the chance that the shackling rule might otherwise evade appellate review, merits an immediate appeal. The Supreme Court might make its task easier by recognizing the one-shot nature of Sanchez-Gomez. In the future, a rule of procedure allowing discretionary appeals from any district court decision might avoid turning easy cases like Sanchez-Gomez into hard ones.

Suggested Citation

Lammon, Bryan, Appellate Jurisdiction in Sanchez-Gomez: A Hard Case that Should Be Easy (April 9, 2018). 96 Washington University Law Review Online 1 (2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3159568

Bryan Lammon (Contact Author)

University of Toledo - College of Law ( email )

2801 W. Bancroft Street
Toledo, OH 43606
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
54
Abstract Views
560
rank
378,727
PlumX Metrics