No. 18-7585
Tags: appellate-court appellate-review criminal-procedure district-court guideline-enhancement guidelines judicial-discretion procedural-error sentencing-court sentencing-guidelines standard-of-review
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-02-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can the sentencing court's statement—that it would impose the same sentence irrespective of any error in its application of a guideline enhancement—absolve the appellate court of its responsibility to ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error in its calculation of the Guidelines?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Can the sentencing court’s statement—that it would impose the same sentence irrespective of any error in its application of a guideline enhancement—absolve the appellate court of its responsibility to ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error in its calculation of the Guidelines? ii
Docket Entries
2019-02-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
2019-02-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-01-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 25, 2019)
2018-11-09
Application (18A504) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until January 18, 2019.
2018-11-07
Application (18A504) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 19, 2018 to January 18, 2019, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Attorneys
Lemuel Gay
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent