No. 18-8256

Mustafa Ahmad Naushad v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-03-04
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: 18-usc-2113 18-usc-924(c) bank-robbery categorical-approach courts-of-appeals criminal-law federal-bank-robbery judicial-discretion legal-definition specific-intent statutory-interpretation sufficiency-of-the-evidence violent-physical-force
Key Terms:
Takings HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-04-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can the courts of appeals define the crime of federal bank robbery differently for purposes of a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge than for a categorical-approach challenge?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Can the courts of appeals define the crime of federal bank robbery differently for purposes of a challenge than for a challenge? prefix

Docket Entries

2019-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-02-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 3, 2019)

Attorneys

Mustafa Ahmad Naushad
Kara Lee HartzlerFederal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
Kara Lee HartzlerFederal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent