No. 18-9763
Stirling Michael Heaton v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: concurrent-sentences concurrent-sentencing criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing discretion federal-guidelines federal-jurisdiction federal-plea-agreement judicial-discretion modification retroactive-amendment retroactive-guidelines-amendment sentence-concurrency sentencing-guidelines sentencing-modification sentencing-reform-act
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
(1). In § 3582(c)(2) proceedings to modify a federal sentence in light of a retroactive amendment to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, does the sentencing court have discretion to adjust to the modified federal sentence in order to achieve concurrency with another criminal sentence?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a sentencing court has discretion to adjust a federal sentence to achieve concurrency with another criminal sentence in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-06-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 24, 2019)
Attorneys
Stirling Heaton
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent