No. 19-8885
Juan Leonardo Cadenas-Urena v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: controlled-substance criminal-procedure drug-manufacturing due-process evidence evidence-sufficiency jury-verdict premises-liability sentencing-guidelines sufficiency-of-evidence
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) DID THE PANEL ERR BY HOLDING THAT THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE JURY'S GUILTY VERDICT?
2) DID THE PANEL ERR BY UPHOLDING THE APPLICATION OF U.S.S.G.§ 2D1.1(b)(12) BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT A FINDING THAT MR. CADENAS-URENA MAINTAINED A PREMISES FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANUFACTURING OR DISTRIBUTING A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the panel err by holding that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury's guilty verdict?
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 31, 2020)
Attorneys
Juan Cadenas-Urena
Amy R Blalock — Blalock Law Firm, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent