No. 18-5308
O'Neil Anthony Harris v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: advisory-guidelines congressional-intent guideline-amendment judicial-discretion sentence-enhancement sentencing-factors sentencing-guidelines sentencing-reform upward-variance
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Immigration
AdministrativeLaw Immigration
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a District Court Disregards Congressional Intent and Imposes an Unreasonable Sentence When it Applies an Upward Variance to the Advisory Sentencing Guideline Range Based Upon Factors Which Were Removed as a Basis For Sentence Enhancement Pursuant to Amendments Which Were Made to the Applicable Guideline Section.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a district court disregards congressional intent and imposes an unreasonable sentence when it applies an upward variance to the advisory sentencing guideline range based upon factors which were removed as a basis for sentence enhancement pursuant to amendments made to the applicable guideline section
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-07-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 20, 2018)
Attorneys
O'neil Harris
Stewart Glenn Abrams — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent