No. 22-5313
Jesse Rondale Bailey v. United States
Tags: 18-usc-3553(a)(6) career-offender criminal-procedure empirical-evidence evidence-based judicial-discretion presumption sentencing-disparities sentencing-guidelines unwarranted-disparity within-range-sentences
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)
When evaluating whether a sentence imposed within the applicable guideline range avoids unwarranted sentencing disparities under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), may a court categorically refuse to consider empirical evidence showing that other judges impose sentences below the guideline range in the vast majority of cases in which the guideline applies, or showing that the guideline itself embodies structural disparities?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a court may categorically refuse to consider empirical evidence showing that other judges impose sentences below the guideline range in the vast majority of cases in which the guideline applies, or showing that the guideline itself embodies structural disparities
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-08-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-08-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 8, 2022)
2022-05-31
Application (21A769) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until August 5, 2022.
2022-05-24
Application (21A769) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 6, 2022 to August 5, 2022, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
Attorneys
Jesse Rondale Bailey
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent