No. 19-5182
Geovanny Antonio Loyola-Villegas v. United States
Tags: appellate-review empirical-basis federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure plain-error presumption-of-reasonableness reasonableness sentencing sentencing-guidelines
Key Terms:
Immigration
Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-11-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether a formal objection after pronouncement of sentence is necessary to invoke appellate reasonableness review of the length of a defendant's sentence.
2. Whether a sentence produced by a guideline that is not empirically-based, illegal-reentry guideline §2L1.2, is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness on appeal.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a formal objection after pronouncement of sentence is necessary to invoke appellate reasonableness review of the length of a defendant's sentence
Docket Entries
2019-11-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-10-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2019.
2019-10-16
Memorandum of respondent United States of America filed.
2019-09-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 16, 2019.
2019-09-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 16, 2019 to October 16, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-08-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 16, 2019.
2019-08-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 15, 2019 to September 16, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-07-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 15, 2019)
Attorneys
Geovanny Antonio Loyola-Villegas
Kristin Michelle Kimmelman — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent