No. 19-6119
Masnik Sainmelus v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review criminal-sentencing district-court firearm-possession firearms guideline-enhancement guideline-range sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation u.s.s.g.-2k2.1
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-11-08
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether The District Court Erred When The Court Increased The
Appellant's Guideline Range Four Levels By Finding That The Offense
Involved Between 8 and 24 firearms under U.S.S.G 2K2.1(b)(1)(B).
2. Whether The District Court Erred When The Court Increased The
Appellant's Guideline Range Four Levels By Finding That The Offense
Involved Between 8 and 24 firearms under U.S.S.G 2K2.1(b)(1)(B).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court erred in increasing the appellant's guideline range by finding the offense involved 8-24 firearms under U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(b)(1)(B)
Docket Entries
2019-11-12
Petition DENIED.
2019-10-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/8/2019.
2019-10-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-09-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 31, 2019)
Attorneys
Sainmelus Masnik
Gregory Antonio Samms — Law Offices of Gregory A. Samms P.A., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent