No. 20-5564
Antonio U. Akel v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: brown-opinion Brown-v-Board due-process Eleventh-Circuit fair-trial recusal recusal-statute resentencing sentencing
Latest Conference:
2020-10-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT'S DECISION AFFIRMING THE DISTRICT COURT'S REFUSAL TO CONDUCT A FULL RESENTENCING WITH THE DEFENDANT PRESENT RENDERS THE PRECEDENTIAL ELEVENTH CIRCUIT BROWN OPINION USELESS AND LIMITED.
WHETHER THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT'S USE OF AN OVERLY HIGH BAR OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL RECUSAL STATUTE EFFECTIVELY EVISCERATED THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS OF A FAIR TRIAL IN A FAIR TRIBUNAL.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Eleventh Circuit's decision affirming the district court's refusal to conduct a full resentencing with the defendant present renders the precedential Eleventh Circuit Brown opinion useless and limited
Docket Entries
2020-10-13
Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2020-09-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-08-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 2, 2020)
Attorneys
Antonio Akel
Noel Lawrence — LAW OFFICES OF NOEL G. LAWRENCE, P. A., Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent