No. 18-7057
Marcus Jermaine Royston v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 3582-motion 3582(c)(2) amendments-750-782 career-offender criminal-sentencing drug-offense guidelines-2d1.1 guidelines-amendment hughes-v-us sentence-reduction sentencing-guidelines sentencing-reduction
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does this Court's ruling in the case of Hughes v. U.S., apply to a career offender seeking reduction in his sentence by way of a 3582(c)(2) motion pursuant to Amendments 750 & 782, when the the career offender's sentence was based on a Guidelines calculation under 2D1:1, which was lowered by both Amendments?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : , Does this Court's ruling in the case of Hughes v. U.S., , : 584 U.S. 2018, No. 17-155, apply to a career offender seeking reduction in his sentence by way of a 3582(c)(2) motion pursuant to Amendments 750 & 782, when the the career offender's sentence was based on a Guidelines calculation under 2D1:1, which was lowered by both Amendments?
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-11-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 14, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent