Robertson v. US EX REL. WATSON, 08-6261.

• Decision Date: 24 May 2010
• Docket Number: No. 08-6261.,08-6261.
• Citation: 130 S.Ct. 2184
• Parties: John ROBERTSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. Wykenna WATSON.
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

130 S.Ct. 2184

560 US __

John ROBERTSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. Wykenna WATSON.

No. 08-6261.

Supreme Court of United States.

May 24, 2010.

Jaclyn S. Frankfurt, Washington, DC, for petitioner.

Robert A. Long, Jr., Washington, DC, for respondent.

Solicitor General Elena Kagan, for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of the Court, supporting respondent.

James W. Klein, Counsel of Record, Jaclyn S. Frankfurt, Lee R. Goebes, Jessica R. Brand, Public Defender Service, Washington, DC, for petitioner.

Robert A. Long, Jr., Counsel of Record, Theodore P. Metzler, Jr., Mark W. Mosier, R. Gregory Rubio, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.

It is so ordered.

Chief Justice ROBERTS, with whom Justice SCALIA, Justice KENNEDY, and Justice SOTOMAYOR join, dissenting.

This is a complicated case, but it raises a straightforward and important threshold issue. When we granted certiorari, we rephrased the question presented to focus on that issue: "Whether an action for criminal contempt in a congressionally created court may constitutionally be brought in the name and pursuant to the power of a private person, rather than in the name and pursuant to the power of the United States." 558 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1011, ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (2009). The answer to that question is no. The terrifying force of the criminal justice system may only be brought to bear against an individual by society as a whole, through a prosecution brought on behalf of the government. The court below held otherwise, relying on a dissenting opinion in one of our cases, and on the litigating position of the United States, which the Solicitor General has properly abandoned in this Court. See Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 12-13, n. 3. We should correct the lower court's error and return the case to that court to resolve the remaining questions.

I

In March 1999, Wykenna Watson was assaulted by her then-boyfriend, John Robertson. App. 40. Watson sought and secured a civil protective order against Robertson, prohibiting him from approaching within 100 feet of her and from assaulting, threatening, harassing, physically abusing, or contacting her. Id., at 20. At the same time, the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) was independently pursuing criminal charges against Robertson arising from the assault.

On June 26, Robertson violated the protective order by again violently assaulting Watson. On July 8, he was indicted for the previous March incident;...