No. 22-6705
Charles Wesley Clearwater v. K. Bennett, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-sentencing due-process inmate-rights rdap rdap-program residual-clause time-credit vagueness
Latest Conference:
2023-03-03
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is it a violation of an inmates Constitutional Rights to due process, to use the Residual Clause criteria to deny him from receiving the on year time credit incentive for completing RDAP? And after the Supreme Court has determined that the Residual Clause is unconstitutionally vague in multiple cases?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is it a violation of an inmate's Constitutional Rights to due process to use the Residual Clause criteria to deny him from receiving the one-year time credit incentive for completing RDAP after the Supreme Court has determined that the Residual Clause is unconstitutionally vague in multiple cases?
Docket Entries
2023-03-06
Petition DENIED.
2023-02-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/3/2023.
2023-02-08
Waiver of right of respondent K. Bennett, Warden to respond filed.
2022-10-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 8, 2023)
Attorneys
Charles Wesley Clearwater
Charles Wesley Clearwater — Petitioner
K. Bennett, Warden
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent