No. 18-6767
Brent Galbreath v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: armed-career-criminal-act constitutional-vagueness due-process error johnson-retroactivity johnson-v-united-states retroactivity sentencing sentencing-error violent-felony violent-felony-definition
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
When a Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), movant would not be an armed career criminal if sentenced today, how can he show that his sentence is infected with error under Johnson when the sentencing court did not specify which clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act's violent felony definition a prior conviction fell under at the time of his original sentencing?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), movant can show that his sentence is infected with error under Johnson when the sentencing court did not specify which clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act's violent felony definition a prior conviction fell under at the time of his original sentencing
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-11-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 21, 2018)
Attorneys
Brent Galbreath
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent