No. 18-8708
Charles Clark v. Joe Coakley, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 21-usc-851 circuit-split controlled-substance-act drug-offense felony-drug-offense habeas-corpus mathis-v-united-states retroactivity sentencing-enhancement
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-05-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the decision handed down in Maths v United States, 136 S.Ct. 2243 (2016) is retroactive in a post-conviction petition, as some courts have stated and creating a split Amoungst the circuits?
Whether the predated Controlled Substance Act misdemeanor convictions could be used to enhance Clark to a life sentence with the predated Controlled Substance Act provisions of 21 USC §851?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the decision handed down in Mathis v United States, 136 S.Ct. 2243 (2016) is retroactive in a post-conviction petition, as some courts have stated and creating a split amongst the circuits?
Docket Entries
2019-05-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
2019-04-16
Waiver of right of respondent Coakley, Warden, Joe to respond filed.
2018-11-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2019)
Attorneys
Charles Clark
Charles Clark — Petitioner
Coakley, Warden, Joe
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent