No. 23-6150
Quindell Tyree Maloid v. United States
Tags: administrative-interpretation administrative-law deference judicial-deference kisor-v-wilkie sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation united-states-sentencing-commission
Latest Conference:
2024-03-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the administrative law principles articulated in Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019), limit the deference owed to the United States Sentencing Commission's commentary on the Sentencing Guidelines?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the administrative law principles articulated in Kisor v. Wilkie limit the deference owed to the United States Sentencing Commission's commentary on the Sentencing Guidelines
Docket Entries
2024-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2024.
2024-02-01
Memorandum of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2023-12-28
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 1, 2024.
2023-12-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 2, 2024 to February 1, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-11-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 2, 2024)
Attorneys
Quindell Maloid
Howard A. Pincus — Fed Pub. Def. for Dist. CO &WY, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent