No. 18-7716
Jesse Ingram, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 3553(a)-factors 5th-amendment appeal appellate-counsel constitutional-violation criminal-procedure due-process fifth-amendment ineffective-assistance-of-counsel retroactive-review retroactivity sentencing sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Immigration
Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-03-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
1). Is it a Fifth Amendment violation when Petitioners are sentenced to a higher guidline sentence when 18 U.S.C. statute 3553(A) warrants a below guidlines sentence.
2). Is McCoy v. Louisiana 584 U.S. (2018) which is retroactive to the Petitioner on direct review when appellate counsel prejudices Petitioner by not challanging the illegally enhanced sentence.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is it a Fifth Amendment violation when Petitioners are sentenced to a higher guideline sentence when 18 U.S.C. statute 3553(A) warrants a below guidelines sentence?
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.
2018-06-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 4, 2019)
Attorneys
Ingram, Jr. Jesse
Jesse B. Ingram, Jr. — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent