No. 18-5266
Michael Ferguson v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: advisory-guidelines arrest-records bare-arrest-records dismissed-charges due-process evidence-reliability hearsay hearsay-evidence reliability-standard sentencing sentencing-guidelines sixth-amendment
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
(1) What standard of scrutiny does Due Process require courts to use when evaluating the reliability of evidence courts rely on to impose a sentence?
(2) Is there a different standard of scrutiny for evaluating the reliability of evidence relied on to impose a sentence within the advisory Guidelines range?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What standard of scrutiny does Due Process require courts to use when evaluating the reliability of evidence courts rely on to impose a sentence?
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-07-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-07-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 17, 2018)
2018-05-14
Application (17A1260) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until July 13, 2018.
2018-05-02
Application (17A1260) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 14, 2018 to July 13, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Michael Ferguson
Colleen P Fitzharris — Federal Defender Office, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent