No. 18-7453
Corey Kirkpatrick Sterling v. United States
Tags: collateral-review constitutional-law criminal-law due-process mandatory-guidelines pre-booker retroactive-effect retroactivity sentencing-guidelines sentencing-guidelines-vagueness sentencing-review vagueness vagueness-doctrine
Latest Conference:
2019-02-22
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2)'s residual clause is void for vagueness vis-à-vis defendants sentenced under the pre-Booker mandatory Guidelines.
Whether the invalidation of § 4B1.2(a)(2)'s mandatory residual clause has retroactive effect in cases on collateral review.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2)'s residual clause is void for vagueness vis-a-vis defendants sentenced under the pre-Booker mandatory Guidelines
Docket Entries
2019-02-25
Petition DENIED. Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari: I dissent for the reasons set out in Brown v. United States, 586 U. S. ___ (2018) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting).
2019-02-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
2019-01-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-01-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 15, 2019)
Attorneys
Corey Sterling
Andrew Lee Adler — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent