No. 20-6237
Tags: criminal-history district-court mitigating-factors mitigation-arguments procedural-reasonableness sentencing substantive-reasonableness
Latest Conference:
2020-12-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
Where the district court failed to consider or address Petitioner's mitigating arguments and focused exclusively on his criminal history, whether the 168-month sentence is procedurally and substantively reasonable.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the 168-month sentence is procedurally and substantively reasonable
Docket Entries
2020-12-07
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-11-10
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-10-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2020)
Attorneys
Jamar Parker
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent