No. 18-5804
Abdoulaye Diallo v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process evidence fraud indictment-delay insufficient-evidence loss-calculation motion-for-acquittal prosecutorial-misconduct reasonable-doubt sentencing snap-fraud statutory-interpretation sufficiency-of-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess Privacy
DueProcess Privacy
Latest Conference:
2018-10-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the District Court failed to grant Petitioner's motion for acquittal due to insufficient evidence of knowledge of fraudulent SNAP transactions
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED l.Whether the District Court failed where did not granted his motion for acquittal because the Government failed to produce sufficient evidence to support a finding that Petitioner knew the fraudulent SNAP transactions beyond a reasonable doubt. ll.Whether the delay to get an indictment and a superseding indictment had substantially prejudiced Petitioner, for sentencing purpose. Ill.Whether the Government's amount of loss calculation was flawed. ~ -~ aii . . ,
Docket Entries
2018-10-09
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-09-06
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-06-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 27, 2018)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent