No. 18-5247

James McCray v. S. L. Burt, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-07-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 6th-amendment constitutional-violation criminal-procedure due-process judicial-discretion jury-trial minimum-sentence plea-bargaining reasonable-doubt sentencing-guidelines sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2018-09-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Sixth Circuit decision is objectively unreasonable as a matter of due process, because McCray's sentencing guidelines offense variable(s) was unconstitutionally scored a total of 40 points, where any fact found by judge that increases the minimum sentence guidelines, not by jury beyond a reasonable doubt, or admitted by the defendant violates the 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED L VMETHER THE SIXTH CIRCUIT DECISION IS _— OBJECTIVELY so TINREASONABL'E AS 8 MATTER OF DUE PROCESS, BECAUSE MCCRAY SENTENCING GUIDEVTNES OFFENSE © VARIABLETS] WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALL'Y SCORED & TOTAL OF 40 POINTS, WHERE ANY FACT FOUND BY JUDGE THAT INCREASE THE MINIMUM SENTENCE GUIDELINES, NOT BY JURY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, OR ADMITTED RY THE DEFENDANT VIOLATES THE 6TH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?

Docket Entries

2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-08-20
Waiver of right of respondent S.L. Burt, Warden to respond filed.
2018-07-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 17, 2018)

Attorneys

McCray, James
James McCray — Petitioner
James McCray — Petitioner
S.L. Burt, Warden
Aaron David LindstromMichigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent
Aaron David LindstromMichigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent