No. 18-6760
David Junior Upshaw v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: acca-sentencing armed-career-criminal-act collateral-review criminal-procedure mandatory-guidelines post-sentencing-law pre-booker-mandatory-guidelines residual-clause retroactivity sentencing-guidelines vagueness void-for-vagueness
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. May a defendant, faced with a silent record below, prove that his ACCA enhanced sentence was in deed based upon the residual clause through a process of elimination? And in doing so, can he rely on post-sentencing case law, including this Court's decisions cla rifying the other ACCA clauses ?
2. Is USSG § 4B1.2(a)(2) 's residual clause void for vagueness with respect to defendants sentenced under the pre -Booker mandatory Guidelines ?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a defendant can prove his ACCA-enhanced sentence was based on the residual clause through a process of elimination and rely on post-sentencing case law
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-11-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2018)
Attorneys
David Upshaw
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent