No. 19-8703

David Sosa-Baladron, et ux. v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-06-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process evidence jury-instructions obstruction-of-justice sentencing-guidelines
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)

I. Did a fatal variance occur when the charge was of one conspiracy but the proofs were of two, one of which there was no evidence of Petitioners' involvement?

II. Was there insufficient evidence of Petitioner Sosa's guilt on the substantive Mail Fraud and Health Care Fraud counts when there was no evidence he took any action to mail or submit false billings to the insurance companies?

III. Was it error to apply the risk of serious bodily injury sentencing guideline enhancement to Petitioners when the whole fraud scheme was designed around fake car accidents where no one got hurt and no one needed medical treatment?

IV. Was it error to apply the obstruction of justice sentencing guideline enhancement to Petitioners because they never suggested that the would-be witness should testify, or not testify, about anything and never asked the third party to relay any message?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict on the substantive counts against Sosa, and whether the district court erred in applying the risk of bodily injury enhancement and the obstruction of justice enhancement

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-06-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-05-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 15, 2020)

Attorneys

Belkis Soca-Fernandez & David Sosa-Baladron
Britt Morton CobbWilley and Chamberlain, LLP, Petitioner
United States of America
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent