No. 18-9164
Antonio Muro, Jr. v. United States
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure due-process judicial-review jurisdiction objection procedural-requirement reasonableness reasonableness-standard sentencing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-02-28
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a formal objection after pronouncement of sentence is necessary to invoke appellate reasonableness review of the length of a defendant's sentence
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether a formal objection after pronouncement of sentence is necessary to invoke appellate reasonableness review of the length of a defendant’s sentence. ! ' This issue is also raised in Holguin-Hernandez v. United States, 18-7739, which is currently before the Court and in which the Court requested a response from the Solicitor General.
Docket Entries
2020-04-03
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2020-03-02
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Holguin-Hernandez v. United States</i>, 589 U. S. ___ (2020).
2020-02-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.
2019-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-03
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2019-06-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 5, 2019.
2019-06-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 5, 2019 to July 5, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-04-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 5, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent