No. 20-8146
Edward Lee Smith v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: compulsory district-court district-court-interpretation judicial-discretion procedural-error sentencing-guidelines united-states-sentencing-guidelines united-states-v-booker
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities
SocialSecurity Securities
Latest Conference:
2021-06-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the District Court committed significant procedureal error when it mistakenly interpreted section 7B1.3(f) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines as compulsory, thus, running afoul of this Court's holding in UNITED STATES v. BOOKER, 543 U.S. 220, 246 (2005).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the District Court committed significant procedural error when it mistakenly interpreted section 7B1.3(f) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines as compulsory, thus, running afoul of this Court's holding in UNITED STATES v. BOOKER
Docket Entries
2021-06-28
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-06-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-05-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 25, 2021)
Attorneys
Edward Lee Smith
Edward Lee Smith — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent