No. 18-6561
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: abuse-of-discretion appellate-review circuit-court-discretion guidelines-range section-3553(a) section-3553a sentencing sentencing-guidelines sentencing-reasonableness standard-of-review substantive-reasonableness
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2018-12-07
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER THE PANEL OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY THE RUBBERSTAMP OF THE ERRONEOUS AND IMPERMISSIBLE CONCLUSION OF ERSTWHILE COUNSEL'S NOTION THAT THE ISSUE OF THE SUBSTANTIAL UNREASONABLENESS OF HIS SENTENCE WAS NOT CERT' WORTHY, UNDER SUPREME COURT RULE 10(a) OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals abused its discretion by the rubberstamp of the erroneous and impermissible conclusion of erstwhile counsel's notion that the issue of the substantial unreasonableness of his sentence was not cert' worthy
Docket Entries
2018-12-10
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.
2018-11-09
Waiver of right of respondent UNITED STATES to respond filed.
2018-10-24
Petition for a writ of prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 5, 2018)
Attorneys
Jesus Denova Lopez
Jesus Lopez — Petitioner
UNITED STATES
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent