No. 18-7973
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: bank-robbery burden-of-proof crime-of-violence criminal-evidence criminal-law criminal-procedure due-process eighth-amendment federal-rules-of-evidence jury-instructions reasonable-doubt sufficiency-of-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment Privacy
DueProcess Punishment Privacy
Latest Conference:
2019-03-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether there was insufficient evidence to prove Villa guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether There Was Insufficient Evidence To Prove Villa Guilty Beyond A Reasonable Doubt? I. Whether Armed Bank Robbery Constitutes A Crime Of Violence Under §924(c)? Ill. | Whether Evidence Of The Police Chase Was Inadmissible Under Federal Rules Of Evidence 404(b)? IV. Whether Villa’s Sentence Violates The Eighth Amendment? 2
Docket Entries
2019-03-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.
2019-02-27
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-02-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 18, 2019)
Attorneys
Jaime Villa
Anders V. Rosenquist — Rosenquist & Associates, Petitioner
Anders V. Rosenquist — Rosenquist & Associates, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent