No. 19-7182
Cirilo Mancilla Lopez v. United States
Tags: appeal appellate-review criminal-procedure due-process legal-objection preservation-of-error sentencing-guidelines sentencing-review standard-of-review substantive-unreasonableness
Latest Conference:
2020-04-17
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether claims of substantive unreasonableness must be preserved by specific objection?
SUB SIDIARY QUESTI ON: Whether the Court should hold the case pending the resolution of
Holguin-Hernandez v. United States , No. 18-7739, 2019 WL 429919, __S.Ct._ _, __U.S.__ (June
3, 2019)(g ranting certiorari ), and potentially grant certiorari , vacate the judgment below, and
remand in lig ht of that case?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether claims of substantive unreasonableness must be preserved by specific objection?
Docket Entries
2020-04-20
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2020.
2020-03-06
Memorandum of respondent United States of America filed.
2020-01-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 6, 2020.
2020-01-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 5, 2020 to March 6, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-01-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 5, 2020)
Attorneys
Cirilo Mancilla Lopez
Kevin Joel Page — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent