No. 18-6241
Edward Jewell v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: class-precedent constitutional-challenge controlled-substance-offense criminal-law direct-appeal due-process mathis-precedent mathis-v-united-states sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation united-states-sentencing-commission
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference:
2018-11-02
Question Presented (from Petition)
Does this Court's holding in Mathis v. United States apply to determinations under the United States Sentencing Guidelines of Whether a prior conviction is a "controlled substance offense"?
Does this Court's holding in Class v. United States entitle Petitioner to challenge the constitutionality of the Statute of conviction on Direct Appeal?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does this Court's holding in Mathis v United States apply to determinations under the United States Sentencing Guidelines of whether a prior conviction is a 'controlled substance offense'?
Docket Entries
2018-11-05
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/2/2018.
2018-10-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-09-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 8, 2018)
Attorneys
Edward Jewell
Edward Jewell — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent