No. 18-6184
Robert Demetrius Barnes v. B. Masters, Warden
Tags: circuit-split concurrent-sentence criminal-procedure federal-appellate-courts federal-sentencing prior-undischarged-term prior-undischarged-term-of-imprisonment sentencing-guidelines sentencing-guidelines-manual-5g1.3(c) statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2018-11-02
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the word "concurrently" in Section 5G1.3(c) authorizes a sentencing court to run a sentence concurrently from the start of the pre-existing sentence, as the Third Circuit has held; or instead, whether the word "concurrently" only permits the sentencing court to run the sentence concurrently with the remainder of the pre-existing sentence (i.e. not concurrently with the full pre-existing sentence), as the Second Circuit and, in the decision below, the Fourth Circuit have held.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the word concurrently' in Section 5G1.3(c) authorizes a sentencing court to run a sentence concurrently from the start of the pre-existing sentence
Docket Entries
2018-11-05
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/2/2018.
2018-10-11
Waiver of right of respondent Masters, Warden to respond filed.
2018-09-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 1, 2018)
Attorneys
Masters, Warden
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Robert Demetrius Barnes
Erica Joan Hashimoto — Georgetown University Law Center, Petitioner