No. 18-8743

Arturo Torres-Cabrera v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-04-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: apprendi-rule apprendi-v-new-jersey criminal-procedure due-process immigration-offense indictment-requirements prior-conviction sentencing sentencing-enhancement statutory-maximum
Key Terms:
Immigration Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-05-09
Question Presented (from Petition)

I. Whether all facts - including the fact of a prior conviction - that increase a defendant's statutory maximum must be pleaded in the indictment and either admitted by the defendant or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt?

Subsidiary questions:

Did the district court err in sentencing Torres-Cabrera to a term of imprisonment greater than two years for a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326?

Are the statutory enhancement provisions in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) unconstitutional because Congress unequivocally intended the enhancements to be sentencing factors, not elements of separate offenses; but under this Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), such a scheme is unconstitutional?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether all facts - including the fact of a prior conviction ~ that increase a defendant's statutory maximum must be pleaded in the indictment and either admitted by the defendant or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt?

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 United States of America to respond filed.
2019-04-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 9, 2019)

Attorneys

Arturo Torres-Cabrera
Peter Michael FleuryOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent