No. 18-6308
Edwin Hernandez v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: acquitted-conduct criminal-procedure due-process duress-defense jury-instructions second-circuit sentencing
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2018-11-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Second Circuit err in finding that the district court's charge correctly stated the requirements for the duress defense?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Second Circuit err in finding that the district court’s charge correctly stated the requirements for the duress defense. 2. Did the Second Circuit err in finding that the court properly considered the acquitted conduct as relevant conduct for sentencing purposes, where the jury may have acquitted petitioner upon a finding that the affirmative defense of duress had been established. i List of All Parties The caption of the case in this Court contains the names of all parties. ii
Docket Entries
2018-11-13
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/9/2018.
2018-10-18
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-10-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 13, 2018)
Attorneys
Edwin Hernandez
Murray Singer — Murray E. Singer Esq., Petitioner
Murray Singer — Murray E. Singer Esq., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent