No. 19-5425
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review career-offender criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing due-process residual-clause sentencing-guidelines substantive-reasonableness united-states-code united-states-v-booker
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a sentence imposed under the Career Offender Guidelines is reasonable in light of the subsequent 798 Amendment to the Guidelines, in a case where the district court failed to comply with the second, discretionary step of a district court's sentencing analysis.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's sentence is substantively unreasonable in reliance on the career offender guidelines residual clause
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-12-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 3, 2019)
Attorneys
Damien Riley
Damien Riley — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent