No. 18-7340

Eric Dillon v. United States

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2019-01-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review circuit-split consecutive-sentences criminal-law criminal-procedure-sentencing due-process federal-statute mandatory-minimum mandatory-minimums sentencing sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation united-states-v-battle
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 924(j) requires a minimum 10-year consecutive sentence

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED (1). SINCE 18 U.S.C.§ 924(j) IS A DISCRETE OFFENSE THAT DOES NOT CONTAIN A MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCE OR REQUIRE A CONSECUTIVE. SENTENCE, DID THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT APPEALS COURT ERR WHEN IT SIDED WITH THE DISTRICT COURT THAT §924(j) REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 10-YEAR CONSECUTIVE SENTENCE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 924 (C)? (2). IN LIGHT OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT OVERRULING UNITED STATES V. BATTLE, DOES THIS IMPLY THE CIRCUITS THAT FOLLOWED THE BATTLE REASONING SHOULD RECONSIDER THEIR POSITION,NOW THAT THE TENTH CIRCUIT HAS ANNOUNCED IN MELGAR-CABRERAS THAT BATTLE WAS WRONGFULLY DECIDED? (2)

Docket Entries

2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-07-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 8, 2019)

Attorneys

Eric Dillon
Eric Dillon — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent