No. 24-6035

Jamel Muldrew v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2024-11-26
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: agency-rules circuit-split constitutional-amendments judicial-factfinding sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference: 2025-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Whether this court's holding in Kisor v. Wilkie, 588 U.S. 558 (2019),
supports the court of appeals' determination that the Sentencing
Guidelines are an agency rule, and if so, does this require a sentencing
court to apply traditional rules of statutory interpretation including the
context of the sentencing provision.

2. Whether Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024) and the Fifth and
Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution prohibit a
sentencing court from enhancing a defendant's sentence premised on
judicial factfinding that a defendant's conduct amounted to a pattern or
practice under U.S.S.G. §4B1.5.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Supreme Court's Kisor v. Wilkie holding supports treating Sentencing Guidelines as agency rules requiring traditional statutory interpretation, and whether Erlinger and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments prohibit sentence enhancement based on judicial factfinding of a defendant's pattern or practice

Docket Entries

2025-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-12-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-12-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-11-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 26, 2024)

Attorneys

Jamel Muldrew
Marie-Louise Samuels ParmerSamuels Parmer Law, P.A., Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent