No. 18-6016

Fabian Sandoval-Ramos v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-09-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: conspiracy controlled-substances criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing drug-offense due-process enhancement-factor mandatory-minimum-sentence mandatory-minimum-sentences sentencing sentencing-enhancements statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2018-10-12
Related Cases: 18-5957 (Vide)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

In order to trigger a mandatory minimum sentence, must the government allege and prove that an enhancement factor was the object of the conspiracy, or can the government simply allege and prove the occurrence of an enhancement factor?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED 21 U.S.C. § 846 provides: “Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this subchapter [involving controlled substances] shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.” 21 U.S.C. § 841 prescribes a number of mandatory minimum sentences that must be imposed upon conviction of a substantive crime involving certain quantities of a controlled substance or when death results from the use of that controlled substance. The question presented is: In order to trigger a mandatory minimum sentence, must the government allege and prove that an enhancement factor was the object of the conspiracy, or can the government simply allege and prove the occurrence of an enhancement factor?

Docket Entries

2018-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.
2018-09-25
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-09-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 18, 2018)

Attorneys

Fabian Sandoval-Ramos
Benjamin T Andersen — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent