No. 18-7570

Anthony Eugene Hardeman v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-01-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 armed-career-criminal-act burden-of-proof circuit-split federal-prisoner habeas-corpus residual-clause sentencing sentencing-enhancement statutory-interpretation successive-motion
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

When a federal prisoner demonstrates that the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause was the only lawful basis to enhance his sentence, but fails to show that the sentencing judge relied on the residual clause, does he satisfy the requirements for a successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h)(2)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW When a federal prisoner demonstrates that the Armed Career Criminal Act’s residual clause was the only lawful basis to enhance his sentence, but fails to show that the sentencing judge relied on the residual clause, does he satisfy the requirements for a successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h)(2)? No. _ In the Supreme Court of the United States ANTHONY EUGENE HARDEMAN, PETITIONER, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Petitioner, Anthony Eugene Hardeman asks that a writ of certiorari issue to review the opinion and judgment entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on October 23, 2018.

Docket Entries

2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2019-02-21
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-01-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 25, 2019)

Attorneys

Anthony Hardeman
Laura G. GreenbergFederal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent