No. 18-6360
Jocelyn Faurisma v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-2113 18-usc-924 armed-bank-robbery constitutional-vagueness crime-of-violence criminal-law due-process federal-criminal-law johnson-v-united-states sentencing-enhancement sessions-v-dimaya statutory-interpretation violent-crime
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2018-11-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether armed bank robbery is a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. §924(c)(3)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW After Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. ___, 185 S. Ct. 2551 and Sessions v. Dimaya, 188 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), can reasonable jurists debate whether armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § §2113 (a) and (ad), is a crime of violence within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §924(c)(3)? i INTERESTED PARTIES There are no
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.
2018-08-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 19, 2018)
2018-06-12
Application (17A1352) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until August 25, 2018.
2018-06-05
Application (17A1352) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 26, 2018 to August 25, 2018, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Attorneys
Jocelyn Faurisma
Daryl Elliott Wilcox — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Daryl Elliott Wilcox — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent