No. 18-6349
Daniel Israel Palomino v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: abuse-of-discretion appellate-review criminal-procedure district-court-review due-process guideline-commentary judicial-discretion judicial-review legal-interpretation sentencing-factors sentencing-guidelines sentencing-procedure statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference:
2018-11-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a district court abuses its discretion in misapplying a sentencing guideline when it refuses to consider a factor expressly provided for in the guideline's commentary
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a district court abuses its discretion in misapplying a sentencing guideline when it refuses to consider a factor expressly provided for in the guideline’s commentary. prefix
Docket Entries
2018-11-19
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/16/2018.
2018-10-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-10-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)
Attorneys
Daniel I. Palomino
Michael Marks — Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
Michael Marks — Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent