No. 18-7716
Jesse Ingram, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 3553(a)-factors 5th-amendment appeal appellate-counsel constitutional-violation criminal-procedure due-process fifth-amendment ineffective-assistance-of-counsel retroactive-review retroactivity sentencing sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Immigration
Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-03-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is it a Fifth Amendment violation when Petitioners are sentenced to a higher guideline sentence when 18 U.S.C. statute 3553(A) warrants a below guidelines sentence?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1). Is it a Fifth Amendment violation when Petitioners are sentenced to a higher guidline sentence when 18 U.S.C. statute 3553(A) warrants a below guidlines sentence. 2). Is McCoy v. Louisiana 584 U.S. _ (2018) which is retroactive to the Petitioner on direct review when appellate ; counsel prejudices Petitioner by not challanging the illegally enhanced sentence. : % ii
Docket Entries
2019-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-06-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 4, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent