No. 18-1550
Gilberto Ramos v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: due-process federal-sentence-enhancement federal-sentencing habeas judicial-review legal-remedy post-conviction-remedy prior-state-sentence proposition-64 resentencing retroactive-relief sentence-enhancement state-conviction state-post-conviction-remedy state-sentence successful-attack
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When does a state post-conviction remedy qualify as a 'successful attack' on a prior state sentence, such that a subsequent federal sentence enhancement is invalidated, and resentencing is warranted?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED When does a state post-conviction remedy qualify as a “successful attack” on a prior state sentence, such that a subsequent federal sentence enhancement is invalidated, and resentencing is warranted?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-06-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 19, 2019)
Attorneys
Gilberto Ramos
Michael Stone Romano — Stanford Law School, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent