No. 22-6567

Pedro Benitez v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2023-01-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-law administrative-procedure-act civil-procedure government-action judicial-review standing
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2023-02-17
Question Presented (from Petition)

(1) When Petitioner's Attorney failed to cite Supreme Court Precedent Deon v United States (20M) in the district Court, did that failure deprive the District Court the Discretion to LOWER the SENTENCE ON the UNDERLYING offense?

(2) When the district Court DENIED PETITIONER 2255 ON AFFIDAVITS ALONE, ON WHETHER COUNSEL who was told by Petitioner to file a STREET appeal Was the District Court REQUIRED to hold a evidence hearing?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

What is the proper standard for determining whether a petitioner has standing to challenge a government action under the Administrative Procedure Act?

Docket Entries

2023-02-21
Petition DENIED.
2023-01-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-01-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 17, 2023)

Attorneys

Pedro Benitez
Pedro Benitez — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent