No. 19-6838

Joshua Smith v. Sandra Butler, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-12-04
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2241 28-usc-2255 appellate-review caselaw federal-procedure guideline-range habeas-corpus incorrect-guideline-range mandatory-guidelines savings-clause sentencing sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2020-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the Courts of Appeals have incorrectly interpreted the 'savings clause', found in 28 USC 2255(e), to require that a defendant be sentenced under mandatory guidelines in order to proceed under 28 USC 2241 by way of 2255(e) when a sentence was based on an incorrect guideline range and subsequent caselaw reveals the error.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Courts of Appeals have incorrectly interpreted the 'savings clause' found in 28 USC 2255(e)

Docket Entries

2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-12
Waiver of right of respondent Sandra Butler, Warden to respond filed.
2019-11-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 3, 2020)

Attorneys

Joshua Smith
Joshua Smith — Petitioner
Sandra Butler, Warden
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent