No. 18-8299
Walter Raynard Lingard v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: allocution-rights appellate-review criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing downward-departure due-process judicial-discretion probation-revocation right-to-allocution sentencing-review
Latest Conference:
2019-04-12
Question Presented (from Petition)
DID THE COURT OF APPEALS ERR IN ITS DETERMINATION THAT THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT ERR IN DECLINING TO VARY DOWNWARD BASED UPON LINGARD'S STATE PROBATION REVOCATION SENTENCE?
DID THE COURT OF APPEALS ERR IN ITS DETERMINATION THAT THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT ERR WHEN IT FAILED TO GIVE LINGARD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE COURT AT SENTENCING?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the court of appeals err in its determination that the district court did not err in declining to vary downward based upon Lingard's state probation revocation sentence?
Docket Entries
2019-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-14
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 5, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Walter Lingard
Walter Raynard Lingard — Petitioner