No. 18-8617
Kristen Patrick Doyle v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeal appeals circuit-court-review criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus jurisdiction legal-motion-type mens-rea sentencing sentencing-enhancement statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2019-04-26
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in its denial of Defendant - Appellant's Motion to be granted relief under the clarifying amendment regarding two-point and five-point sentencing enhancements that now require a mens rea element?
Did the court use a fine line to conclude that the Motion is not a Title 28 U.S.C. Section 2255, but rather a Title 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c)(2)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in its denial of Defendant - Appellant's Motion to be granted relief under the clarifying amendment regarding two-point and five-point sentencing enhancements that now require a mens rea element?
Docket Entries
2019-04-29
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
2019-04-05
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-06-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 29, 2019)
Attorneys
Kristen Patrick Doyle
Kristen Patrick Doyle — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent