No. 18-5693
Arlow Antone Kay v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: making robust appellate review unnecessary appellate-review constitutional-interpretation criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing district-court district-court-discretion sentencing sentencing-guidelines united-states-v-booker
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Have the departure provisions of the United States Sentencing Guidelines been rendered "obsolete" and "superfluous" by this Court's opinion in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), rendering robust appellate review of district courts' applications of these provisions unnecessary?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Have the departure provisions of the United States Sentencing Guidelines been rendered 'obsolete' and 'superfluous' by this Court's opinion in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), rendering robust appellate review of district courts' applications of these provisions unnecessary?
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-08-28
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-08-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 21, 2018)
Attorneys
Arlow Kay
Daniel Lee Kaplan — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent