No. 18-8324
Johnny Madison Williams, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-law due-process residual-clause retroactivity sentencing statutory-interpretation violent-crime
Key Terms:
DueProcess Takings HabeasCorpus
DueProcess Takings HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-04-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), retroactively void as unconstitutional the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B)?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Questions Presented for Review 1. Did Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), retroactively void as unconstitutional the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B)? 2. Can federal armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) be a crime of violence under the elements clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) when the offense fails to require any intentional use, attempted use, or threat of violent physical force?
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 of America to respond filed.
2019-03-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 8, 2019)
Attorneys
Johnny Williams, Jr.
Michael Filipovic — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Michael Filipovic — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent