No. 18-6985
Dwayne Barrett, aka Sealed Defendant 3, aka Tall Man v. United States
Tags: circuit-split constitutional-challenge criminal-law due-process federal-statute sentencing statutory-interpretation vagueness-doctrine void-for-vagueness
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-06-27
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the residual clause at 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B) is void for vagueness
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the residual clause at 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B) is void for vagueness, a question that evenly divides six Courts of Appeals. i
Docket Entries
2019-07-30
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2019-06-28
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of United States v. Davis, 588 U. S. ___ (2019).
2019-06-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/27/2019.
2019-02-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-11
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2019-02-11
Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.
2019-01-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 11, 2019.
2019-01-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 10, 2019 to February 11, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-01-03
Response to motion from petitioner Dwayne Barrett filed.
2018-12-20
Supplemental brief of petitioner Dwayne Barrett filed.
2018-12-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 10, 2019)
Attorneys
Dwayne Barrett
Matthew B. Larsen — Federal Defenders of New York, Petitioner
Matthew B. Larsen — Federal Defenders of New York, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent