No. 20-5454

Mark Shields v. R. C. Smith, Warden, et al.

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-08-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-rights criminal-procedure due-process ex-post-facto judicial-individualization parole parole-considerations sentencing sentencing-rights stage-1-calculation standing takings
Latest Conference: 2020-10-30
Question Presented (from Petition)

F Whhe specifeS.7-1steE Reveinnane
Consider a actuall produ of a Mandted litial Individulized Parle Considerdon
heingo R
ab a ubsuenb ProlCnsloheaing m nt seemto be 2exig Sntning
ssbulit affe thousand of Pre senened offendes who ho been

c
Sd

Paolk Consideton dtes for pre-G97 sentenred offenders.
T
to e
en


pe Co d bhe Box oos eL
tlif ofen wo crme weComml befo the nAdu TH TosTAk MAROL Ro
T

prlbower pebleoer and il smaly
Siluated pre-1997 tierm Lo life offendor
−×
the applist o rid p
FIV, is iE pANISHAble LO be DENIFD ACCESS TO THE OURTS,

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a specified § 333.7 C1 stage-1, Cig bl Le Review' initial hearing' can be considered a actual product for a mandated judicial individualized Parole Consideration hearing

Docket Entries

2020-11-02
Petition DENIED. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2020-10-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/30/2020.
2020-08-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 23, 2020)

Attorneys

Mark Shields
Mark Shields — Petitioner