No. 18-7723
Randy Dempsey v. United States
Tags: 28-usc-2255 armed-career-criminal-act circuit-split federal-prisoner residual-clause section-2255 sentencing sentencing-enhancement successive-motion
Latest Conference:
2019-03-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
When a federal prisoner demonstrates that the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause was a basis for enhancing his sentence, but fails to show that the sentencing judge actually relied on the residual clause, does he satisfy the requirements for a successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When a federal prisoner demonstrates that the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause was a basis for enhancing his sentence, but fails to show that the sentencing judge actually relied on the residual clause, does he satisfy the requirements for a successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255?
Docket Entries
2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2019-02-21
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-01-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 4, 2019)
Attorneys
Randy Dempsey
Judy Fulmer Madewell — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent