No. 18-6763
Luis Antonio Bonilla, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeal-waiver appeal-waivers brady-standard brady-v-united-states circuit-split criminal-procedure judicial-discretion miscarriage-of-justice plea-agreement plea-agreements sentencing sentencing-guidelines sentencing-uniformity
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What standards should govern the enforcement of appeal waivers in plea agreements?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 5 WHAT STANDARDS OTHER THAN THE KNOWING AND VOLUNTARY WAIVER STANDARD OF BRADY V. UNITED STATES SHOULD GOVERN THE ENFORCEMENT OF APPEAL WAIVERS IN PLEA AGREEMENTS? II. IS A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S WAIVER OF HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL ENFORCEABLE WHERE THE SENTENCING COURT USES AN IMPROPER SENTENCING GUIDELINE THAT INCREASES A SENTENCE BY 21 MONTHS AND THE DEFENDANT RECEIVED NO SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT FROM THE PLEA BARGAIN? i
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-11-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2018)
Attorneys
Luis Antonio Bonilla, Jr.
Michael W. Patrick — Law Office of Michael W. Patrick, Petitioner
Michael W. Patrick — Law Office of Michael W. Patrick, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent