No. 24-5366
Marquise Thomas v. United States
IFP
Tags: child-exploitation criminal-punishment jury-determination mandatory-minimum restitution-order sixth-amendment
Latest Conference:
2025-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)
Does the Sixth Amendment require a jury to find the facts needed to justify a restitution order meeting or exceeding § 2259(b)(2)(B)'s $3,000 mandatory minimum?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the Sixth Amendment require a jury to find the facts needed to justify a restitution order meeting or exceeding the $3,000 mandatory minimum for child exploitation offenses?
Docket Entries
2025-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-12-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-12-02
Reply of petitioner Marquise Thomas filed. (Distributed)
2024-11-22
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2024-10-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 22, 2024.
2024-10-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 23, 2024 to November 22, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-09-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 23, 2024.
2024-09-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 23, 2024 to October 23, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-08-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 23, 2024)
Attorneys
Marquise Thomas
Katherine Howard — Office of the Federal Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent