No. 18-8698
Marcel A. Walton v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: clear-error clear-error-analysis criminal-procedure due-process false-and-misleading government-assertions material-facts non-record-facts sentencing
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-04-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can a sentencing court rely upon government assertions concerning material, non-record facts?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Consistent with Due Process, can a sentencing court rely upon government assertions concerning material, non-record facts—first raised at the sentencing hearing—some of which are false and misleading? 2. Did the Seventh Circuit err by failing to conduct the “clear error” analysis mandated byFed. R. Crim. P. 52(b) and U.S. v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993)? i
Docket Entries
2019-04-29
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
2019-04-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-01-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2019)
Attorneys
Marcel Walton
Adam P. Merrill — Sperling & Slater, Petitioner
Adam P. Merrill — Sperling & Slater, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent