No. 19-5979
Rodrigo Pablo Lozano v. United States
Tags: apprendi-rule apprendi-v-new-jersey conspiracy conspiracy-offense criminal-restitution deliberate-avoidance due-process hester-v-united-states mental-state ninth-circuit sentencing sixth-amendment
Latest Conference:
2020-02-21
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) applies to the imposition of criminal restitution, as suggested in Hester v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 509 (2019) (Gorsuch, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari).
2. Whether a "deliberate avoidance" mental state is sufficient for a conspiracy offense.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) applies to the imposition of criminal restitution
Docket Entries
2020-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2020-01-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-27
Reply of petitioner Rodrigo Lozano filed.
2020-01-15
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-12-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 15, 2020.
2019-12-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 16, 2019 to January 15, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-11-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 16, 2019.
2019-11-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 14, 2019 to December 16, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-15
Response Requested. (Due November 14, 2019)
2019-10-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.
2019-10-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-09-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 17, 2019)
Attorneys
Rodrigo Lozano
Benjamin Lee Coleman — Coleman & Balogh LLP, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent