No. 18-9830
Michael Franklin Einfeldt v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 2255-petition burden-of-proof criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus johnson-ruling johnson-v-united-states residual-clause sentencing sentencing-guidelines violent-felonies violent-felony
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, where the record is unclear, a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petitioner should be required to "affirmatively prove" that the sentencing court relied on the residual to pursue a claim for relief under Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petitioner should be required to affirmatively prove the sentencing court relied on the residual clause
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 29, 2019)
Attorneys
Michael Franklin Einfeldt
Nova Danielle Janssen — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent