On October 4, 2017, the Supreme Court held oral arguments on District of Columbia v. Wesby and Class v. United States. In District of Columbia v. Wesby, law enforcement officers responded to noise complaints of a party going on in a home where the owner was not present. The officers removed partiers from the premises though the partiers thought that their host, a renter, had attained permission for the party. The case seeks to answer two questions: First, whether officers have probable cause to arrest for unlawful entry under D.C. law despite a claim of good-faith entry? Second, whether the law was sufficiently clearly established to justify the denial of immunity to the officers?
In Class v. United States, Rodney Class pled guilty in a district court to possession of three firearms on United States Capitol grounds. He later appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on grounds of constitutional error and statutory error but was affirmed as guilty under his original guilty plea. Does a guilty plea waive a defendant’s right to challenge the constitutionality of his conviction? William Haun, an associate of the Antitrust and Litigation Groups at Shearman & Sterling LLP, joined us to discuss the oral arguments and potential impact of the cases.
William J. Haun, Associate, Shearman & Sterling LLP