No. 18-7715
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure district-court-discretion drug-quantity due-process federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure minor-role minor-role-reduction plea-bargaining plea-colloquy rule-11 sentencing sentencing-guidelines standard-of-review ussg-3b1.2
Latest Conference:
2019-03-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Was the District Court's failure to determine a factual basis, and to insure that defendant understood the nature of the charges, in violation of Rule 11(b)(1)(G).
Did the District Court err in denying defendant a minor role reduction to his base offense level under USSG § 3B1.2(b).
Whether the District Court incorrectly attributed a greater drug quantity, since no drugs were ever tested, weighed, or taken into evidence.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was the District Court's failure to determine a factual basis, and to insure that defendant understood the nature of the charges, in violation of Rule 11(b)(1)(G)
Docket Entries
2019-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-06-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 4, 2019)
Attorneys
Jose Flores
Jose Flores — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent